• Methio@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    147
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Just note how the guy starts with “only Microsoft numbers can be trusted” is biased bullshit. Pretending a company will give true numbers at all time, is a big lie. If anything they will inflate numbers and they’d try to hide the truth as much as they can because investors are watching.

    While there will be truth in bots taking a part of the traffic, the whole article is Microsoft bootlicker talk.

    Taking another random tool that seems to filter bot for results is just him trying to get a confirmation for his bias.

    Yes a 10% stat at a given time by a given measurement tool, is not equal to a true 10% userbase. Yes there are bots. Yes there are Linux and Windows zombies alike.

    Still, linux desktop is going up, with a fraction of the marketing power Windows and Apple have.

    • _Nemo_@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      2 days ago

      Still, linux desktop is going up, with a fraction of the marketing power Windows and Apple have.

      This isn’t entirely true. Linux is getting a lot of help from Microsoft. <wink wink>

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        They say every million in Microsoft ad spend is a quarter point in Linux desktop share.

    • the_weez@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      2 days ago

      FWIW this website is always like this, every article I’ve read from latest feels like it came from the MS PR desk.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I wonder why that could be, rofl!

        Surely MSFT would always be clear, transparent, and forthright with the public, ahahahaha!

    • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Just note how the guy starts with “only Microsoft numbers can be trusted” is biased bullshit.

      I would argue misquoting someone to fit your argument is more a egregious example of “biased bullshit”.

      Only Microsoft or OEM partners can tell you with the highest accuracy how many people use Windows now versus five years ago.

      This is literally true. They’re not saying they WILL tell you the accurate numbers, they’re saying only they have those numbers to tell.

      • MachineFab812@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I own 6 Windows Professional licenses. I am presently using two. You really think Microsoft are the ones to trust?

        Having numbers others don’t doesn’t make those numbers useful or true in every context.

        • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          No. No one is telling anyone to “trust Microsoft”, no one is saying “the numbers Microsoft reports are true”. That is a quote the guy above invented from thin air.

          Edit: but for the record, it would be lawsuit territory for MSFT to actually publish false numbers. The shareholders would absolutely ream them. They’re allowed to not post numbers, but they’re not allowed to post false numbers.