oh example point and case: Adobe Flash has 98% ubiquity right? ok.. here's a math puzzle for you.. Flash on average has around 8million installs per day (365 days a year) and can spike up to 33million depending on release / campaigns in market. There are currently approx 1.6billion - 2billion (give or take) people online right now that we can probably say with a thumb suck number as being unique...
If you have 98% "as-is" installs, how does one still buy into this confirmation bias. --- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.riagenic.com On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Scott Barnes <[email protected]>wrote: > David / All. > > Thats not accurate. Ubiquity stats are a developer's placebo, as in the end > we noticed at trend in around this argument when it came to Silverlight. > Initially when we had ~10% ubiquity world wide Flash having 98% etc it was > an extremely tough battle and what got us over the line really was > developers assuming that we'd push Silverlight out over the Windows Update - > obviously one can't given the consent decree, but why confirm that. > > To artificially boost the numbers we'd then sign OEM's etc to socket > Silverlight into place and combine that with some fiddling around with the > numbers (rounding out and tweaking some estimates etc here and there) you in > turn arrive at a "download" rate. The reality is finding a number in around > ubiquity had to be around 70% there abouts (based of information gotten from > Adobe/Macromedia as they noticed around this number was the tipping point > for developers accepting that the current iteration of Flash was seeded). No > matter what we would do in around Silverlight in its first couple of years > of birth was never going to hit 70% so we then looked at "why" 70% was the > number needed. > > The more investigations taken place the more we learn that the developer(s) > needed to be convinced that persona(s) like Soccer Mums etc world wide would > have to have a version of Silverlight installed before a development team > would agree to adopt the technology in a public consumer facing way. It's > basically nothing to do with the soccer mum deciding whether or not they > would install, it had everything to do with the psychology of the team who's > about to create something for the said soccer mum to install. > > Enter Bejing Olympics. It not only highlighted this as a reality but it > also underpinned a stark contrast in that we had around 100's of millions > (forget the actual number) of downloads and we also broke records in around > user viewing habits when it came to online watching (ie avg person spent > 20mins+ watching vs most video sites of this number bottom out around > 3-5mins). So here you have a huge success story that highlights that in > reality people will install a freakin virus if it means getting to content > they want - yet - it still wasn't enough to become a tipping point for > development teams to fully embrace Silverlight in a consumer focused fashion > (that and the tooling story etc is still somewhat crappy) > > In short, what really is your success story here around any web facing > solution is your exit numbers or abandonment rates combined with how you > solicit a user to persist in the experience. If all you do is put in place a > "Get Silverlight" badge and then cry foul when you find out 80% of your > unique visitors said "bugger that, bye" then well it was not really > Silverlight's problem it was more along the lines of "why should i get > silverlight?" > > The downside is you have to also sell the end user on why they should get > Silverlight to experience your site but also why Silverlight is a long term > investment in their download prospects... > > HTML5 is not going to change this equation, if anything it probably will > get a bit more chaotic and lethargic over time given all browsers cant just > "support HTML5 spec as-is and then leave it at that" - they all still need > to differentiate and thus one can expect forking of the "purity and > innocence" of what a browser does today to what it will do tomorrow...so if > anything all thats happening is we're shifting the plugin deeper inside the > browser and hiding behind the developer ubiquity cloak of stupidity :) > > Chasing the "one-technology platform to rule them all" belief is really > what phscyology calls a "confirmation bias" > > *Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a > tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions > or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true* > > Read: http://www.riagenic.com/archives/36 - What does a potential > Silverlight Adoption Lifecycle look like? > > > --- > Regards, > Scott Barnes > http://www.riagenic.com > > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:32 PM, David Connors <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:31 PM, James Chapman-Smith < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> If I'm going to develop a new "web-based" application in HTML or >>> Silverlight, what would the comparative effort be like? And really, what >>> kind of pros & cons are worth evaluating? >>> >>> >>> >>> By HTML I am thinking ASP.NET MVC, but it could be something else >>> ".NET"-ish. >>> >>> >> What is the target audience? If it is something that you're targeting at a >> mass market, using SL is suicide IMO. >> >> http://www.statowl.com/silverlight.php >> >> <http://www.statowl.com/silverlight.php>40% of users either >> don't/can't/won't have SL installed. Wave goodbye to their money. >> >> -- >> *David Connors* | [email protected] | www.codify.com >> Software Engineer >> Codify Pty Ltd >> Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417 >> 189 363 >> V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors >> Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact >> >> >
