browsers, os, resolution etc

carl_galloway · Post by **carl_galloway** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:44 pm

Hi all,

I've been taking a look at my site stats for October, visitors are down quite a bit because I've been doing other things and haven't posted as much but it still makes for interesting reading.

Browsers: Mozilla 43.01%, MSIE 37.38%, Unknown 8.82%, Netscape 7.18%, Opera 3.35%, KDE 0.24%

Screen Resolution: 1024x768 37.5%, 1280x1024 21.25%, 800x600 11%, 1152x864 3.5%, 1400x1050 2%, 1600x1200 1.25%, Unknown 23.25%

Color depth: 4 Billion colors (32 bit) 80.25%, 16 Millions colors (24 bit) 8.5%, 65,536 colors (16 bit) 6%, Unkown 5.25%

Page impressions for the month totalled 9975, with total unique visitors 4195, but this doesn't include feed subscribers.

Not sure how useful this info will be to anyone else, but I thought it was interesting to see that mozilla (most likely firefox) is the most popular browser. Anyone else want to share some of their stat's, might be useful for the developers and template designers to see how our blogs are being viewed.

Carl

Post by **mattsches** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:50 pm

Heh, sounds like fun, so here are my browser and screen res stats for october:

Browsers:
Firefox 46.75%, IE 39.81%, Safari 5.63%, Opera 5.43%, ....

Screen Resolution:
1024x768 44.46%, 1280x1024 27.17%, 1280x800 6.81%, 1152x864 4.83%, ...

Post by **yellowled** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:18 am

Unfortunately my webalizer doesn't give me the resolutions, but I can give you the browsers:

32% Mozilla/5.0 (this should be Firefox, I guess)
27.6% MSIE 6.0 (Gnagnagna. I hate it with a passion!)
2.22% Opera9 (which probably is just one person - a friend of mine who uses Opera

)
and an encouraging 1.63% MSIE 7.0 (we need more of those)

October was a pretty good month actually. Buying a new no-name MP3-player and blogging about it can really boost those numbers ...

carl_galloway · Post by **carl_galloway** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:28 am

Wow, interesting how many of our visitors are using Firefox, I wonder if this because Serendipity users are more geeky than the other engines so we attract geeky visitors, or are we a small minority. I'd be really interested in more feedback from other users because I'm sure this info will be useful to template designers, and also I guess I'm really surprised at the number of people still using 1024x768 resolution.

@yellowled, have you got adsense? Its worth it when you start talking about mp3 players, mobile phones etc.

Post by **yellowled** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:16 am

carl_galloway wrote:Wow, interesting how many of our visitors are using Firefox, I wonder if this because Serendipity users are more geeky than the other engines so we attract geeky visitors, or are we a small minority.

Might be because both of us have some articles on HTML/CSS, which attracts web people, who usually use Firefox.

carl_galloway wrote:@yellowled, have you got adsense? Its worth it when you start talking about mp3 players, mobile phones etc.

Nope, still an ad-free, just-for-fun blog

d_cee · Post by **d_cee** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:01 am

Hi
I thought I'd join the party too

Here's my october stats.

Browsers
Mozilla 42.33%, IE 39.65%, Unknown 7.88%, Netscape 7.54%, Opera 2.26%, KDE 0.34%.

Screen res
1024x768 37.75%, 1280x1024 26.50%, 800x600 6.25%, 1600x1200 2.50%, 1152x864 1.75%, 1400x1050 1.00%, 640x480!! 0.25%.

Pages & Visitors
Visits: 1248, Page Views: 4807, Daily Unique 1152.

Well, if nothing else all the figures go to show that Firefox takeup amongst the Serendipity communtity is higher than average - as I guess you'd expect. Harder to believe that I've had a visitor (only 1) with a 640x480 monitor!

The lowest figure for general IE use I've seen is 55%.
W3schools figures:
October IE7 3.1%, IE6 54.5%, IE5 3.2%, Fx 28.8%, Moz 2.4%, N7/8 0.3%, O7/8/9 1.4%

cheers

Dave

carl_galloway · Post by **carl_galloway** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:28 pm

Thanks Dave, I think this thread is starting to confirm one of two things, either our traffic is unusual because of our content, or Serendipity attracts a different set of users whose visitors are more aware of the options. I'd love to hear from other active members of this forum, especially if they aren't template designers or developers. I'm sure you'll agree Dave, this sort of information is invaluable if we get enough of it, one of the things that occurs to me from looking at everyone's results, we can probably design new templates for 1024x768 and almost forget about making templates support 800x600, and this is why I'd love to hear from some of the Serendipity users.

stm999999999 · Post by **stm999999999** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:03 pm

and here my stats - a little privat blog:

1 8833 24.20% Internet Explorer 6.0 (Win)
2 8149 22.32% Firefox
3 5243 14.36% Opera
4 2689 7.37% Internet Explorer 5.0
5 2316 6.34% Googlebot
6 1769 4.85% Yahoo! Slurp
7 1289 3.53% msnbot
(no visits but page impressions I think - in german "Anfragen")

whereas I have to say, that my stats for the last two month are not reliable to me:

The stats say, that my little, personel blog has 1,5GB last month and 600 MB this month! Is this reliable for a little site? I have a greater website (http://defo.info) whith near the same visit/traffic-rate, but this is a great site of my students-organisation, my blog is a little private one!

And even the visiter count is crazy: webalizer says "5440", the s9y-intern statistic says "6646 visitor(s) this month", blogcounter says "618" and blogcount "858"

the other infos from blogcounter:

Internet Explorer 272 44 %
Mozilla 252 40.8 %
Opera 55 8.9 %
Netscape 35 5.7 %

1024x768 966
1280x1024 928
1280x800 112
1152x864 104
800x600 65
1400x1050 57
1600x1200 57
1280x960 40
1440x900 37
1680x1050 32

carl_galloway · Post by **carl_galloway** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:20 pm

@Stephen, your internal Serendipity stat's are probably higher because it counts your feed visitors, whereas your other stat's programs might not. The way Serendipity works is that your template file isn't called at all when a feed is requested, so the javascript for most stat's programs is never activated, meaning they won't count feed subscribers. Also, some of the javascript stat's programs won't count your stat's if your visitors have disabled javascript or third party cookies.

BTW, I really don't like webalizer, it never seemed to produce accurate results for me, but awstats did, and was almost the same as adsense page impressions and the adfreestats that I use (thanks Dave for introducing me to adfreestats)

Post by **yellowled** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:03 am

carl_galloway wrote:almost forget about making templates support 800x600, and this is why I'd love to hear from some of the Serendipity users.

So you're gettin' lazy, huh?

As for the resolutions: Hold on, I remember having one(!) visitor with 800x600 the other day ... but, yes, looking at my stats from blogcounter.de (a free German blogcounter) I find that most of my visitors already use a bigger resolution than I do myself (still 1024x768).

YL

Post by **yellowled** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:08 am

carl_galloway wrote:BTW, I really don't like webalizer, it never seemed to produce accurate results for me, but awstats did, and was almost the same as adsense page impressions and the adfreestats that I use (thanks Dave for introducing me to adfreestats)

I agree. Almost always ever since I started using the aforementioned blogcounter.de, I've had differences between it's results and the webalizer my hoster supplies. adfreestats looks really interesting, I think I'll give it a try. Edit: ... well, I would, but their sign-up page gives me a 404

Post by **mattsches** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:23 pm

I don't think you will find any service or tool that gives you 100% correct stats, even if you parse your access_log with analog or a similar script. Or, to put it another way, the results from different tools will never be the same.

But you can get a general idea of who is visiting blog (and how) by looking at any of these stats, and I think that's what it's all about. I used to include a couple of services in my blog, look at webalizer, and parse my logs, but this is overkill, at least for blogs with a couple of thousand visitors/month.

What I'm doing right now is use different tools for special tasks, i.e. Google Analytics for general stats, FeedBurner for analysing my feeds, blogscout.de ranking for vanity

stm999999999 · Post by **stm999999999** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:26 pm

but a difference 1:10?
And, what is most mystical to me is the (I think) very hight traffic rate! 1,5 GB a month for a little private blog!?!?!?

Post by **yellowled** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 4:47 pm

After fighting a whole afternoon with awstats (great tool, but I wanted to use it offline with downloaded apache logs - that's not too easy ...), I can now present some more detailed browser/os stats. However, awstats doesn't seem to produce stats on resolution. (By the way, here's another factor which falsifies these stats - of course, I'm visiting my own blog, too. So I can account for some of the Linux and Firefox stats for myself.)

This is October 2006:

Operating Systems:

Windows 69.5% (60.3% WinXP; I've also had one sole visitor using Windows 3.xx, must be a *very* brave person ...)
Linux 12.1%
Mac 2% (basically all of them Mac OS X)
plus some Solaris, *BSD and 16.1% Unknown

Browsers:

MSIE 40.1%
Firefox 35.5%
Opera 3.4%
Netscape 3.1%
Mozilla 2.8%
Konqueror 1.3%
Safari 0.5%

Unknown 12.5% and 1 sole user using lynx (yet another very brave person

)

Detail on MSIE:

IE7 2.1%
IE6 37.1%
IE5 0.7%

plus 17 visitors using IE4 and 1 user using IE3

Which of course basically means I can ignore any IE below 6 and pray that those 37.1% using IE6 will soon update to IE7 ... as for the problematic Netscape 4 and below - well, let's just say the numbers are small enough to ignore those

YL

carl_galloway · Post by **carl_galloway** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:14 pm

@yellowled, we probably all want to ignore netscape, but if youy look at my stat's, its over 7%. I thought Netscape was dead and buried, but it turns out they own a large ISP in the US and ship their browser on a disk for their ISP subscribers, and they have quite a large corporate base. I didn't find a download link so I haven't tested it, but I'd be interested in knowing if their browser is basically the same as Firefox, or whether its still got all those annoying old-style netscape quirks.