Yes, but from a country to another, the % of internet users may vary a lot: in some countries it’s more than 95%, in others it’s less than 50%. As these data tends to be not super accurate, at the end I prefer to stick to the Can I Use data (coming from Statscounter), which are the less inaccurate ones.
What I'm proposing is not to change data source, but to use use the data you have to display how many actual human beings are impacted. It puts percentages in perspective.
So, your website says that 45.08% of Pitcairn Islands use IE11, Wikipedia (I'm sure there's a database somewhere to get population data) says that 50 people live on Pitcairn, which means that an estimated 22 are using IE.
This way, you can show that that percentage amount to that many amount of people, you could even show an estimated total of how many humans on Earth are still using IE11 by summing the IE11 users in each country.
Yes, but many % people in Pitcairn are using internet?
The data from Can I Stop, Can I Use and StatsCounter are usage market shares, so they are relative to internet visitor usage, not to living population.
For exemple, during a typical day I’m regularly browsing on at least 6 browsers, but in the browsers usage data I’m not 1 user, I’m 6 entries, one for every technical context I’m using.
So you can’t compare browsers usage data to people data.
The data from Can I Stop, Can I Use and StatsCounter are usage market shares, so they are relative to internet visitor usage, not to living population.
Ah! Got it, thanks for the clarification, now I understand! I thought they were unique visitors, though not even that would be literally comparable to population without some sampling (many users could use the same device or appear as one single device by using a NAT).
Well, let's not do that then :D
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Yes, but from a country to another, the % of internet users may vary a lot: in some countries it’s more than 95%, in others it’s less than 50%. As these data tends to be not super accurate, at the end I prefer to stick to the Can I Use data (coming from Statscounter), which are the less inaccurate ones.
What I'm proposing is not to change data source, but to use use the data you have to display how many actual human beings are impacted. It puts percentages in perspective.
So, your website says that 45.08% of Pitcairn Islands use IE11, Wikipedia (I'm sure there's a database somewhere to get population data) says that 50 people live on Pitcairn, which means that an estimated 22 are using IE.
This way, you can show that that percentage amount to that many amount of people, you could even show an estimated total of how many humans on Earth are still using IE11 by summing the IE11 users in each country.
Yes, but many % people in Pitcairn are using internet?
The data from Can I Stop, Can I Use and StatsCounter are usage market shares, so they are relative to internet visitor usage, not to living population.
For exemple, during a typical day I’m regularly browsing on at least 6 browsers, but in the browsers usage data I’m not 1 user, I’m 6 entries, one for every technical context I’m using.
So you can’t compare browsers usage data to people data.
Ah! Got it, thanks for the clarification, now I understand! I thought they were unique visitors, though not even that would be literally comparable to population without some sampling (many users could use the same device or appear as one single device by using a NAT).
Well, let's not do that then :D