🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 30 Mar 2002 15:10:08 -0500, "Jim Davis"
<newsmonkey@vboston.com> wrote:

>Looking at the Superstats page we can infer (although we can't see directly
>as they don't, in my opinion, make very good use of the data collected) the
>following for the site being looked at:

Well as they're javascript isn't very good. relying on browser
detection, even the statistics they do gather have to be regarded as
dubious - the sample is obviously biased towards those browsers they
do detect properly.  The examples page is also on a very limited
sample size 80,000 chosen by visitors to a page is not statistically
significant for anything other than the page in question... 

>So now let's attempt to related this to the Superstats page.  Well you can't
>get a client area at 800x600 of 800 or greater unless you make the window
>larger than the available viewing space.  However about 60% of browser
>widths are 800 or greater!

Of course you can, you can have a window of at least 10,000 by 10,000
on any windows OS I've seen, I don't know what the limit is, but
screen size certainly isn't it.

>The numbers just don't add up.

Interesting analysis, but as you notetotally flawed due to the data
available.

>So, I guess what I'm (still) saying is that screen resolution data isn't
>irrelevant. 

So how is it relevant, and what do you do with it once you get it?

Jim.