RE: st: RE: (New) Popularity of R, SAS, SPSS, Stata...

["Muenchen, Robert A (Bob)" <muenchen@utk.edu>]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu [mailto:owner-
>statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Nick Cox
>Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 7:06 AM
>To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
>Subject: RE: st: RE: (New) Popularity of R, SAS, SPSS, Stata...
>
>Whether the bug is Bob's or Google's, it's stochastic for me. Sometimes
>I get through, sometimes I don't. (Experience on quite different
>machines.)
>
>Having read it just now, I have two comments:
>
>1. This document repeats a misconception already corrected publicly
>
><http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/lwgate/STATALIST/archives/statalis
t
>.1006/date/article-1172.html>
>
>-- namely that SSC downloads are in some sense equivalent to Stata
>downloads. Downloads from Stata's own website and from user-maintained
>sites other than SSC are not included in SSC data. I don't have any
>figures for Bob, but I am confident that SSC data alone greatly
>underestimate download activity. You only have to realise that all
>-update-s are excluded to see that. Of course, SSC data are of interest
>in their own right, but at best they are a proxy for Stata activity in
>total.

I said that the downloads on that link are similar to those of
Bioconductor. It's similar in that they contain only add-ons. Neither
the Bioconductor site nor SSC contain the main products, R and Stata,
respectively. But I can see that people who don't know Bioconductor
would have no way of knowing that. I've changed that sentence to clarify
it:

"Similar figures for downloads of Stata add-ons (not Stata itself) are
available at
http://logec.repec.org/scripts/itemstat.pf?type=redif-software.";  

Thanks for the advice!

>
>2. statalist and statalist-digest are managed separately. I just did a
>count, and got 3696 members as a total. I checked and found only 48
>people sad or keen enough to subscribe to the list and the digest. Thus
>the number of Statalist subscribers is currently above 3600. (The
number
>of list and digest subscribers is currently about equal, so it's clear
>that Bob counted list but not digest, or perhaps vice versa.)

Yes, I'm sorry about that. Martin Weiss tried to set me straight on that
on Tuesday but Microsoft decided to toss his email into the Junk folder.
Grrr! Luckily he persisted with my Google address & I fixed it this
morning, sorting Stata into its rightful place higher in the table.

Cheers,
Bob

>
>Nick
>n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk
>
>Muenchen, Robert A (Bob)
>
>Nick Cox
>
>>But the third time didn't work. Sorry, but there it is.
>
>I've heard from a few people who say they have trouble. I've hit it
here
>from several computers, browsers, etc. I've personally only seen this
>happen once, a couple of months ago. I suspect a Google Sites bug. -Bob
>
>
>*
>*   For searches and help try:
>*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
>*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
>*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/