I can't point you to any sources since I'm not allowed to post news articles, but I can say that is quite surprising.
QuoteBut just a half-year after MySpace launched, it surpassed Friendster in monthly visitors and now ranks 13th among all sites, according to Nielsen/NetRatings. ComScore Media Metrix places it fourth by total page views, two notches above Google.
Is traffic by hit or by a amount of bandwidth used?
Eww, a mention of myspace, I feel dirty just reading it!
mmm, MySpace, yum, its where I stalk hismajesty/trust
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 13, 2006, 05:20 PM
I can't point you to any sources since I'm not allowed to post news articles, but I can say that is quite surprising.
It seems like in every second post you bring up how "you're not allowed to post news articles." Instead of being so bitter, you should have interpeted the message as a request to show some restraint, not "you post another news article, and you get banned." For the last few months when I've checked general computing or politics, about 90% of the new threads have seemed to be trivial news articles you've posted (without any intelligent accompanying comments). People wanted this to stop.
For crying out loud, try and use good sense and stop whining.
#1) I'm not whining
#2) How can this be interpretted any differently?
Quote from: GrokStop posting news articles to our forums.
Maybe that REALLY means, "only post when you REALLy need to"?
#3) The topic isn't about me & my posting, its about MySpace vs. Google traffic
On Topic:Its so sad that MySpace traffic is so much bigger. I wonder what it is in relation to news sites & such.
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 13, 2006, 05:57 PM
#1) I'm not whining
#2) How can this be interpretted any differently?
Quote from: GrokStop posting news articles to our forums.
Maybe that REALLY means, "only post when you REALLy need to"?
#3) The topic isn't about me & my posting, its about MySpace vs. Google traffic
Thanks for reminding me what the topic is about, and not listening to what I said. I'll repeat myself: "use good sense and stop whining." I don't want it to go from Crazed posting too many silly news articles to Crazed posting too much about how he can't post news articles. If you understand what bothered people about your posts, then take responsibility and fix that. I guarantee Grok, and most others, won't mind if you post an occasional news article and make an intelligent contribution to the thread.
Oh by the way, this thread counts as a news item. Just because you don't post a link, (but even quote something), doesn't make it "not news".
I've kept restraint in posting news, I figured this would be interesting as its computer related.
Also, just to point out Grok said news articles, specifically, I refrained from posting an article.
(http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?w=379&h=216&r=6m&y=r&u=myspace.com/&u=google.com)
(http://traffic.alexa.com/graph?w=379&h=216&r=2y&y=r&u=myspace.com/&u=google.com)
Seeing as how those are updated on-the-fly, I have yet to see proof that MySpace has more traffic than Google.
Newby, is that in hits or in bandwidth?
Probably hits. "Daily Reach" meaning hits.
However, that's still a ton of bandwidth Google has to put up with. Far, FAR more than MySpace could ever dish out, seeing as how MySpace (from what I hear) is always breaking randomly...
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=www.myspace.com
Rank #12.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=www.google.com
Rank #3.
Quote from: Newby on February 13, 2006, 07:04 PM
Probably hits. "Daily Reach" meaning hits.
However, that's still a ton of bandwidth Google has to put up with. Far, FAR more than MySpace could ever dish out, seeing as how MySpace (from what I hear) is always breaking randomly...
That would be my thinkin on the MySpace vs. Google scenario too.
I don't know, maybe I'll go see if I can't find that article again.
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2006/02/12/myspace_a_new_online_star_that_isnt_google/
Funny how ironic it is that I used google to find that :P
How is that ironic in the least bit?
I think it's pathetic they'd compare their traffic to Google. Are they fucking stupid?
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 13, 2006, 08:02 PM
How is that ironic in the least bit?
There's a claim that MySpace gets more traffic despite the fact I used google to find an article pretaining to it?
Quote from: Networks on February 13, 2006, 08:42 PM
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 13, 2006, 08:02 PM
How is that ironic in the least bit?
There's a claim that MySpace gets more traffic despite the fact I used google to find an article pretaining to it?
ooooh, that is qquite ironic, ha.
very cool
It's really not the end of the world that he posts news topics to discuss. However ... Crazed, you might want to follow 2 rules.
First, don't make a topic you have almost no feedback, or in this case, facts, of your own to start the discussion with. If you can't make a discussion unique to your own standards, and fill it with unproven or false information, you're just filling our forums with misleading garbage that isn't worth reading. Secondly, pick only a couple worthy topics worth posting about in a day. When you can't follow these, then you don't really deserve to post in the first place.
If you have more free time to talk about every single topic in the news today, then I can only recommend that you start taking part in the world, rather then just watching it. :P (Yes, that means get a life)
As for the topic at hand, the only way MySpace would be higher then Google is with bandwidth. Though, you never know. It could be in hits also, everyone knows those MySpace freaks click the Refresh button on their website like every 30 seconds in order to see if they have a new message. hehe :-X
I'm only posting few threads a week now.
I didn't post anything to back up my claim because Grok doesn't want me to.
Topic:
That's what I was thinkin too, MySpace bandwidth > Google bandwidth. That'd make more sense than number of hits. Although, with Google Video now out i won't make much sense. I spose that article could be relying on older (pre Google Video) data.
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 14, 2006, 11:55 AM
I'm only posting few threads a week now.
I didn't post anything to back up my claim because Grok doesn't want me to.
Grok isn't an idiot, so I'm guessing you are and misinterpreted him some way. :P Just saying that someone told you to continue posting but to leave out any actual info about your topic is retarded.
Quote from: Hostile on February 14, 2006, 03:13 PM
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 14, 2006, 11:55 AM
I'm only posting few threads a week now.
I didn't post anything to back up my claim because Grok doesn't want me to.
Grok isn't an idiot, so I'm guessing you are and misinterpreted him some way. :P Just saying that someone told you to continue posting but to leave out any actual info about your topic is retarded.
Just leave it alone.
Newby, or anyone for that matter, do you know of a site that compares the bandwidth from sites much like the graphs Newby posted?
Quote from: effect on February 14, 2006, 01:51 AM
crazed, get a fucking life, your making me cry from the amount of bandwith you are wasting
loser
That's why I rarely post in this sub-forum, nothing good to reply to, other then his spamming news posts.
On Topic:
Google > MySpace
Quote from: CrAz3D on February 14, 2006, 11:55 AM
That's what I was thinkin too, MySpace bandwidth > Google bandwidth. That'd make more sense than number of hits. Although, with Google Video now out i won't make much sense. I spose that article could be relying on older (pre Google Video) data.
video.google.com eats a LOT of bandwidth. I'm sure Google has more hits and bandwidth usage than MySpace.
Quote from: Newby on February 13, 2006, 07:04 PM
Probably hits. "Daily Reach" meaning hits.
However, that's still a ton of bandwidth Google has to put up with. Far, FAR more than MySpace could ever dish out, seeing as how MySpace (from what I hear) is always breaking randomly...
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=www.myspace.com
Rank #12.
http://www.alexa.com/data/details/?url=www.google.com
Rank #3.
It should be noted that Alexa isn't an accurate cross-section of the Internet population.
Quote from: iago on February 17, 2006, 04:06 PM
It should be noted that Alexa isn't an accurate cross-section of the Internet population.
It's the closest you'll get to accurate, seeing as how it comes (came?) pre-installed on a Windows XP box. :)
Quote from: Newby on February 17, 2006, 07:30 PM
Quote from: iago on February 17, 2006, 04:06 PM
It should be noted that Alexa isn't an accurate cross-section of the Internet population.
It's the closest you'll get to accurate, seeing as how it comes (came?) pre-installed on a Windows XP box. :)
You're right, it's the closest... but there's no accurate way :P
And yeah, I forgot that Windows came with free Spyware. So it's more accurate than I gave it credit for, but still not accurate.
xD MySpace ownz
myspace its self is a giant baked turd. The scripts running it are utter shit, they keep trying to add feautres and add features while their current scripts are buggy and inefficient, they clearly do not have skilled programmers. If I worked for google id be very offended that anyone would compare me to myspace in any way at all. The people over at myspace need to learn a thing or two about time complexity it seems. They using bubble sorts or something? Its horrible.
Id venture to say myspace eats more bandwidth because you have each myspace user these days with its whole music thing where bands can put up like 4 or 5 songs and then each user can add those songs to their profile, then the songs can be downloadable if the band so chooses. Then you have the whole pictures section. But a lot of content is also linked off of myspace, like any videos on myspace.