SIGIA-L Mail Archives: RE: SIGIA-L: real player vs. windows med
RE: SIGIA-L: real player vs. windows media player
From: GARZA GOMEZ, GLORIA (SBC-MSI) (gg1373_at_sbc.com)
Date: Thu Apr 04 2002 - 10:10:14 EST
Stats from the following article may be useful to you:
RealNetworks Critical Of Microsoft Tactics
The Washington Post; Washington, D.C.; Mar 21, 2002
On cross-examination, Microsoft attorneys sought to demonstrate that Real
has flourished, doubling its user base from 125 million in May 2000 to 250
million now. They also used RealNetworks documents to show that Real has
struck several agreements, some of them exclusive, with computer makers to
make the Real Player the default media player.
Microsoft boasts even more dramatic growth for its media player, which grew
from a user base of 17 million in 1999 to 350 million today, according to a
spokesman, who attributed the jump to both an improved product and its
automatic distribution with Windows. He added that recent industry data also
show usage of the Windows player surpassing that of the Real Player.
Regards,
Gloria G. Gomez, MLIS
-----Original Message-----
From: Ziya Oz [mailto:ZiyaOz_at_earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 12:47 AM
To: sigia-l_at_asis.org
Subject: Re: SIGIA-L: real player vs. windows media player
"Norstrom, Eric" wrote:
> can anyone tell me where i can find stats on the install base of real
player
> vs. windows media?
This turns out to be a slightly more difficult task than it first appears,
since 'install base' may mean any number of things. There are essentially
two sources of such stats:
[1] Real and Microsoft announcing download stats or paid 'research'
findings. Trust them as much as you can trust a lawyer defending a client or
a mom boasting about her children. Just because a piece of software is
downloaded or shipped with a new PC doesn't mean it's actually utilized. If
you add all the claims about Real, WMP and QT combined, every man, woman and
child would be watching/listening to a stream 25 hours a day.
[2] Monitoring companies like Nielsen and Arbitron. Unfortunately, sampling
methodologies used by these companies are not that reliable. On many
occasions they had to alter their stats because of various considerations,
omissions, misunderstandings, favoritism, inconsistencies, etc.
If you need numbers to justify a business model to a VC or something, by all
means, use the numbers and/or fudge. But if you want to risk money for your
own business, I'd take the numbers you'll find with a grain of salt the size
of Alaska.
Best,
Ziya
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:55:08 EST
|
