<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New Flash Player Penetration Stats</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2003/04/28/new-flash-player-penetration-stats/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2003/04/28/new-flash-player-penetration-stats/</link>
	<description>code = joy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 01:36:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lewis Francis</title>
		<link>http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2003/04/28/new-flash-player-penetration-stats/comment-page-1/#comment-1643</link>
		<dc:creator>Lewis Francis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2003 07:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/?p=510#comment-1643</guid>
		<description>Regarding the 22% &quot;Don&#039;t Know&quot; figure: at first I though the same thing, but it struck me as odd that there was no concomitant &quot;Don&#039;t Know&quot; number for PC users.

Since Mac users are generally thought to fall somewhere in the 3-6% range of total users, a &gt;22% figure in the NPD sampling doesn&#039;t seem very representative, does it?  I&#039;m wondering if the 22% figure isn&#039;t actually reflective of the total group, Mac and PC users alike, and the placement of the number in the Mac column is a presentation mistake?

Compounding my confusion, the sample survey doesn&#039;t have a &quot;Don&#039;t Know&quot; selection for browser type.

If we assume the rest of the information is accurate, then there&#039;s a lot of good reading here.  Kudos to Macromedia for publishing this info!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding the 22% &#8220;Don&#8217;t Know&#8221; figure: at first I though the same thing, but it struck me as odd that there was no concomitant &#8220;Don&#8217;t Know&#8221; number for PC users.</p>
<p>Since Mac users are generally thought to fall somewhere in the 3-6% range of total users, a >22% figure in the NPD sampling doesn&#8217;t seem very representative, does it?  I&#8217;m wondering if the 22% figure isn&#8217;t actually reflective of the total group, Mac and PC users alike, and the placement of the number in the Mac column is a presentation mistake?</p>
<p>Compounding my confusion, the sample survey doesn&#8217;t have a &#8220;Don&#8217;t Know&#8221; selection for browser type.</p>
<p>If we assume the rest of the information is accurate, then there&#8217;s a lot of good reading here.  Kudos to Macromedia for publishing this info!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zeh</title>
		<link>http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2003/04/28/new-flash-player-penetration-stats/comment-page-1/#comment-1642</link>
		<dc:creator>zeh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2003 22:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/?p=510#comment-1642</guid>
		<description>I wish we get South America back on NPD&#039;s survey someday.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wish we get South America back on NPD&#8217;s survey someday.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: g.wygonik</title>
		<link>http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2003/04/28/new-flash-player-penetration-stats/comment-page-1/#comment-1641</link>
		<dc:creator>g.wygonik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2003 00:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/?p=510#comment-1641</guid>
		<description>i just like that fact that under the &quot;User Profiles&quot; section, apparently 22% of Macintosh users basically have NO IDEA what browser they are using (&quot;Don&#039;t Know&quot;) - and that that figure is the biggest percentage of Mac users!!! too funny! :-)

thanks for the update!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i just like that fact that under the &#8220;User Profiles&#8221; section, apparently 22% of Macintosh users basically have NO IDEA what browser they are using (&#8220;Don&#8217;t Know&#8221;) &#8211; and that that figure is the biggest percentage of Mac users!!! too funny! :-)</p>
<p>thanks for the update!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/2003/04/28/new-flash-player-penetration-stats/comment-page-1/#comment-1640</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2003 23:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mikechambers.com/blog/?p=510#comment-1640</guid>
		<description>The problem with those stats is that we don&#039;t really know the percentage of people that have a A lot of people will have to download a newer player when encountering rich internet applications.
I wish MM would publich the number of downloads of the latest release.

Something like :
1 Million out of the 19 million downloads of the Flash MX player is the latest release (rxx)

Many of the Flash players that were included with OSes are buggy, but people tend not to upgrade unless they are forced to</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem with those stats is that we don&#8217;t really know the percentage of people that have a A lot of people will have to download a newer player when encountering rich internet applications.<br />
I wish MM would publich the number of downloads of the latest release.</p>
<p>Something like :<br />
1 Million out of the 19 million downloads of the Flash MX player is the latest release (rxx)</p>
<p>Many of the Flash players that were included with OSes are buggy, but people tend not to upgrade unless they are forced to</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

