help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: How big is the "niche" of Emacs users?


From: Bastien
Subject: Re: How big is the "niche" of Emacs users?
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 11:00:40 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.0 (gnu/linux)

Dieter Wilhelm <address@hidden> writes:

> I think http://popcon.debian.org/ can be a good quantitative source,
> if you know how to supply your queries (unfortunately I don't).

Yes, thanks.

I made a rough gathering of data from the popcon data:
http://popcon.debian.org/source/by_inst

Quoting the webpage:

  "This package sends every week the list of packages installed and the
  access time of relevant files to the server via email. Every day the
  server anonymizes the result and publishes this survey. For more
  information, read the README and the FAQ."

So I gathers information on Emacs and Vim and turned it into a table.
Of course this in inaccurate in many ways:

0. this is only for the last week
1. this is only debian-based
2. there is no "vi" package
4. it's not dependency-aware
3. the list of chosen packages is *very* inconsistent

But still interesting IMHO.

  name                  inst    vote     old   recent   no-files  
 -------------------+--------+-------+-------+--------+----------
  emacspeak-ss            55       0       0        0         55  
  emacspeak              103      14      70       19          0  
  emacs-jabber           120       0       0        1        119  
  qemacs                 209      51     142       16          0  
  emacs-chess            256       0       0        0        256  
  emacs-wiki             310       0       0        0        310  
  emacs-lisp-intro       382       0       0        0        382  
  emacs21-non-dfsg       491       0       0        0        491  
  emacs22-non-dfsg       502       0       0        0        502  
  emacs-goodies-el      4492       1      18        2       4471  
  xemacs21-packages     5235       0       0        0       5235  
  xemacs21             10618    4055    5542      754        267  
  emacs22              11573    4711    1469      761       4632  
  emacsen-common       12782    3247    2980      581       5974  
  emacs21              29628   15534   10609     2022       1463  
 -------------------+--------+-------+-------+--------+----------
  SUM (Emacs)          76756   27613   20830     4156      24157  
 -------------------+--------+-------+-------+--------+----------
  vim                 178257   51439   77299    43706       5813  
  vimacs                  86       0       0        0         86  
  jvim                   105      26      43        6         30  
  vim-syntax-gtk         139       0       0        0        139  
  vimhelp-fr             182       0       0        0        182  
  vimoutliner            385      64     281       40          0  
  vim-addon-manager      765     109     120      536          0  
  vim-latexsuite         952       0       0        0        952  
  vim-scripts           2715     181     919      144       1471  
 -------------------+--------+-------+-------+--------+----------
  SUM (Vim)           183586   51819   78662    44432       8673  

And now this is interesting:

- vote / inst ratio: Emacs: 0.36 | Vim: 0.28
- old / inst ratio : Emacs: 0.27 | Vim: 0.43

... suggesting (to me) that, when installed, Emacs is maybe more likely
to be used than vim.  Again, this doesn't take Vi into accound, which is
a huge bias.

>From popcon
~~~~~~~~~~~

<name> is the source package name;

The fields below are the sum for all the binary packages generated by
that source package:

<inst> is the number of people who installed this package;
<vote> is the number of people who use this package regularly;
<old> is the number of people who installed, but don't use this package
      regularly;
<recent> is the number of people who upgraded this package recently;
<no-files> is the number of people whose entry didn't contain enough
           information (atime and ctime were 0).

-- 
Bastien




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]