31–40 of 48 posts
The Readme says "Warning that it can take a long time: between 20 to 30 days." How in the world can it take so long time? The csv file seems to be 24mb in size and the computation performed can't be that advanced. Did the author do something seriously wrong?
What? I guess this is a toy program used to learn clojure or sth - it even uses sed for line parsing. A 10-line php script could do the same with a few MB of RAM
The script seems to detect a WordPress site by looking for a meta generator tag containing WordPress:
https://github.com/tanrax/calculate-wordpress-usage/blob/5aa...
It's pretty common to remove that meta tag — popular WordPress theme frameworks like Genesis do it by default.
A more reliable test would be to look for additional strings in the source that point to the use of WordPress, such as “wp-content” and “wp-includes”.
A faster way that avoids string searches would be to send an HTTP head request to `/wp-login.php` and check for:
Set-Cookie: wordpress_test_cookie
(/wp-login.php doesn't always appear in the root directory and it's not always accessible to all IPs, but that setup is most common).
Only ? Looks like a big number for worldwide usage, no ?
WP itself usually puts the estimate at 25-30%.
This is a pretty amazing feat. The top 1 million sites includes many who have the money to afford custom sites and yet Wordpress is still almost 1/5 of sites.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https...
The test is likely to be under-reporting WordPress installations as it stands. The script seems to detect a WordPress site by looking for a meta generator tag containing WordPress: https://github.com/tanrax/calculate-wordpress-usage/blob/5aa... It's pretty common to remove that meta tag — popular WordPress theme frameworks like Genesis do it by default. A more reliable test would be to look for additional strings in…
The Readme says "Warning that it can take a long time: between 20 to 30 days." How in the world can it take so long time? The csv file seems to be 24mb in size and the computation performed can't be that advanced. Did the author do something seriously wrong?
However, this is an [embarassingly parallel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embarrassingly_parallel) problem, and renting out some machines would speed it up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
W3techs profiles the top 10 million sites which shows a percentage of 34% [1]. You might be right. [1] https://w3techs.com/technologies/overview/content_management...
The article says: "Afirman que usan una base de datos de 10 millones de dominios sacadas directamente de Alexa, pero cuando vas a la fuente no existe. Alexa solo proporcionan 1 millón." Translation: They [W3techs] say they use a database of 10 million domains taken directly from Alexa, but when you inspect the source, it doesn't exist. Alexa provides only 1 million.
Edit: confirmed by aws: https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=167457