This is the problem with the OP I was talking about. Comments without any reasoning or insight, just "this is it". And this is why length of the comment is usually negatively correlated with comment quality.
You failed to tell why you didn't trust the numbers in your original comment. Was it because of Statcounter? Do you suspect they were cooked up by Microsoft? Or did you feel that it didn't jive with your real world anecdote? Or did you think Windows 8 is such a failure that such numbers are impossible?
"I don't trust those numbers" can mean any or all of the above including more, the replies have to guess what you meant.
> "I don't trust those numbers" can mean any or all of the above including more, the replies have to guess what you meant.
No, you [they] do not have to guess; one could inquire for clarification, or simply ignore the comment.
To make a gross logical fallacy -- such as Untog did -- is not my fault nor is it my problem. Untog drew a conclusion where data was nonexistant, and then extrapolated his conclusion to draw an even more unsubstantiated conclusion.
What is so hard about not putting words in someone's mouth?
