81–89 of 89 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's truly lame, but I always have to laugh when I hit CTRL + END on their question-pages
Could you please explain this a bit more? I'm not sure if this a browser specific thing but on opera I just get to the bottom of the page. edit: Oh, I was looking on a page that had no answers. Didn't realise that at the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you please explain this a bit more? I'm not sure if this a browser specific thing but on opera I just get to the bottom of the page. edit: Oh, I was looking on a page that had no answers. Didn't realise that at the time.
I still don't get it? There's nothing interesting at the bottom of their pages...
If you receive a search result on Google that points to an EE question page, you can see the answers at the end of the page. EE tricks casual visitors into thinking they need an account by putting a long list of things at the top of the page and the real answers all the way at the bottom. This way Google ranks the question/answer but people think they need to buy an account.
Example Google Search (Click 2nd link): http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&...
note If you visit the link directly, the real answers disappear. Yet another sneaky EE trick, this time preventing bookmarking/direct linking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
decrease in monthly uniques (-2.69%) against continued strong growth (10.70%)? The overall market is growing because there are two (2M visitors/month combined, vs 900k a year ago). But the mix has steadily changed. If that's not market share loss, what is it?
That's correlation at best, not causation. And the significance of the difference is questionable at that. I presume there are other programmer websites in the world than stackoverflow and expertsexchange. The miniscule decrease you note can hardly be attributed to stackoverflow, just because stack overflow is the other company on the graph. It needn't even be competitive forces at play. It could be that expertsexcha…
No graph can show action ('taken') so as to demonstrate causation. That's why so many arguments are susceptible to "correlation/causation" trouble. As you suggest, there are any number of causes for the data given. To seek proof of causation from a single graph is a flawed venture.
But if we look at whether market share was reduced ('away'), an observation may be made from a single graph. Not to say 'why' or 'how much', but the observation is still valid. If you sell 90 cars last year, and 110 cars this year -- and I sell 5 comparable cars last year and 50 comparable cars this year, I have "taken market share" from you in a generally accepted sense. Within the market space of two, I have more share of our market this year than the previous, even if your sales did not decrease. It doesn't matter how I did it (cause). It may not be true next year (correlation). It may not be universally true -- if there were 500 of this kind of car sold last year, and only 400 cars this year, your share of the total market increased.
My conclusion before, and again: "the mix has steadily changed. If that's not market share loss, what is it?"
I'd say catching, but not eating away. There's nothing in this graph that suggests market share is being taken away.
If two sites cater to the same clientele, and stackoverflow has gone from zero to some significant fraction, how is that not a market share going from 100% to ~70%? Just because there is no huge decrease in ee doesn't mean they are not losing market share, because all those stackoverflow hits could have been ee.
Before you get too excited, experts exchange still had +55.27% growth, it's not like it's dying. There isn't much of a trend to the (absolute) gap between the two sites.
say it with me everybody - correlation is not equal to causation
About time... I can't be the only one who thinks Experts-Exchange is lame...
Agreed - they've been corrupting my search results for far too long. Its refreshing to see this in its place.
Greasemonkey (or Opera user javascript as I believe that's mostly compatible) script to remove experts-exchange results from any google query. Saves you from having to use a different search or use -site: stuff.
Should be easily extendable to hide/dim/highlight/whatever any sites you want to see less/more of.