Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

QuickTime To Get Boost From "More Accurate" Statistics

Posted by pudge on from the statistics-is-as-statistics-does dept.

Justen writes "Nielsen is expected to release a new set of ratings for media players on July 1. Apple lobbied the firm to use new methods to form usage statistics. The new methods are expected to dramatically increase the reported market share of QuickTime. Nielsen says it doesn't reflect a dramatic jump in actual installations, just a more accurate picture of what's been there all along. The article also mentions the new beta of QuickTime 6 and its support for MPEG-4, ahead of Real and Microsoft."

6 of 50 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Get rid of the ad by PythonOrRuby · · Score: 4, Funny

    You can actually do that yourself. Just pay the $29 for Quicktime Pro and it goes away. ;-)

  2. Re:MPEG-4 support by pi+radians · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Straight from Apple's QT6 FAQ

    Will Apple MPEG-4 interoperate with other MPEG-4 technologies?
    The MPEG-4 specification is large and contains provisions for many technologies. However, any .mp4 file containing compliant MPEG-4 video and AAC audio should interoperate with QuickTime 6. If you find any interoperability issues please let us know. Other technologies that report to be MPEG-4 compliant, yet are not contained in an .mp4 file, will not interoperate with QuickTime 6 or other MPEG-4 players. Divx and MPEG-4 from Microsoft are common examples.

    Well, there you kinda of have it, no. Although I heard that DivX5 will be completely compatible. But I don't know for sure.

    Apple decided to actually follow standards, and not just jump on the "buzzword bandwagon" and do their own thing. Only time will tell if it pays off.

    --

    sin(6cos(r)+5A)
  3. For you Windows users here... by inkswamp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... who are compaining about the annoyances with QT for Windows, you have two simple options.

    1. Send your suggestions/compaints to Apple. The current Apple isn't the same as the circa-1995 Apple that wouldn't listen to its users. Apple seems strangely eager to cater to users nowadays. Go to their site and make your thoughts known.

    2. Get a Mac. I'm not being a smart-ass or a nutball Mac advocate, but Apple specializes in Mac software. Their Windows version of QT is so-so, but the Mac version is beautiful. I've used WMP, Real and QT on both platforms, and QT on Mac is light-years ahead of any other combination (with the possible footnote that Real's audio streaming seems to have a *very slight* edge, although QT's audio stream doesn't litter your drive with those annoying .rm files.)

    I have a feeling that Apple will likely never make Windows QT better or equal to QT on the Mac and I can't say I totally fault them for it (not justifying it, but I can't see the rationale.)

    --Rick

    --
    --Rick "If it isn't broken, take it apart and find out why."
  4. Re:Alternate Title Large Corp Lobbies To Change St by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read the article.

    Apple got them to recalculate the stats in their favor because their earlier algorithms were, um, erroneous.

    Then think about this quote, from Mark Twain I believe. "There are three kinds of lies. Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

    Statistics is all about taking raw data and making predictive or explanatory statements from them.

    How can you count Quicktime usage?

    How about downloads per month?
    How about upgrades per release?
    How about hits to Apple.com/quicktime per month?
    How about number of .movs downloaded per month?

    All of them are reasonable.

    Would you believe, that until now, Quicktime .movs streamed to web browsers weren't counted? That's what Apple convinced Nielson to do. Count embedded .movs.

    --

    GPL Deconstructed
  5. Re:What Quicktime Needs by benwaggoner · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First off, Apple isn't trying to manipulate statistics - they were badly, badly undercounted before. In one study, only application launches were counted for playback, so any QuickTime viewed in-line inside a web browser didn't count. Since QuickTime by default works in-browser, while WM and Real go to the player by default, this erroneously hurt QuickTIme's ranking.

    Kudos to Neilson for recognizing their bad statistics, and trying to correct them.

    As for your other points, have you tried a recent version of QT Player for WIndows? While QT4 had an ugly UI, QT5 is quite nice, and QT6 is better yet. Also, QuickTime has a smaller installer download than either WM or Real now, when you run the web installer. How's that bloated?

    There is plenty of optimization for Intel processors in QuickTime. Sorenson Video 3, the main video codec, had a lot of hand tuning in it for Intel (bear in mind Apple didn't create it).

    It sounds to me like you haven't installed QuickTime since 2000 or so. Give it a whirl today and see if you like it better.

    --

    My video compression blog
  6. Statistics have already been released. by finnatic · · Score: 4, Informative

    There are two *newer* stories on cnet than the one referenced:

    http://news.com.com/2100-1023-938423.html

    and

    http://news.com.com/2100-1023-938827.html.

    The result? Apple is closer to it's competitors, but Real still leads, and is losing it's lead to MSFT.

    A better link for Nielsen/Net Ratings (or whatever they're called - at least it's not "monday"):
    http://www.nielsen-netratings.com/