My personal favorite here is, without doubt, the analytics chart. Amazingly vacuous visualisation. Doesn't really matter what you think of Tufte's work, but this type of presentation amounts to not much more than wasted space.
Alternate title: How not to represent data in an infographic.
Holy crap, that bulls-eye graph makes pie charts look extremely useful in comparison. Yuck yuck yuck.
The web development language percentages only add up to 53.96% since it just shows stats for 3 languages, which probably aren't the top 3 most popular, as Ruby usage only comes in at 1.96%. The infographic could be improved to show usage percentages for say the top 10 most common languages.
I'm assuming that there are still a large number of static websites, without any server-side programming. But either way, a percent graph that doesn't add up to 100% is just absurd.
There are probably lots of static websites, but I also suspect that there were lots of dynamic web sites that are difficult to analyze.
Interesting that ASP.NET is second only to PHP and holds a huge lead over RoR.
The infographic is too full of eye candy (crap graphs) to be of any use. If you don't stare directly at the fans they cause an optical illusion and seem to spin.
Just out of curiosity, where are they pulling the numbers from? I wasn't aware Internet Explorer had such a massive lead on Chrome.
IE probably has huge numbers because it's prevalent in the corporate world. Most corporations use Microsoft and either discourage or prevent their employees from downloading other browsers.
If these people that are forced to use IE at work aren't tech savvy then they probably continue using IE at home.
Wonder how these numbers look when weighted by page views. Should be a good indication of what "happening" websites are made of.