Since when does being a non-profit organization prevent something from being "name brand"? The Red Cross is as high up on brand recognition as you can get, and its an NPO.
Firefox has more name recognition than Opera, thus it is a name brand. Opera is a well recognized name in web tech circles, but you have a lower chance of finding a random Joe Shmo on the street that recognizes that name vs. Firefox.
This is not a bash on Opera by any means, I am more often turned off by brand name hype.
I downloaded and read the whitepaper that is linked from that article.
The summary is an obvious skewing of the actual findings to focus on Akamai's business.
A couple key examples are:
"Which of the following factors are most influential in your decision to continue shopping with an online store where you have shopped in the past? (Select all that apply.)" - 65% said good navigation, page load time was 8th of 13 with only 40%.
"Typically, how long are you willing to wait for a single Web page to load before leaving the Web site? (Select one.)" - 21% said 3 - 4 seconds, however 30% were willing to give the page 5 - 6 seconds (broadband numbers) and another 38% were willing to wait more than 6 seconds.
This was the main finding of the survey actually. Because it was produced by Akamai however, they ignored the top 7 reasons customers leave a site or won't come back, to focus on #8 - site load times.
Navigation, security, and easy checkout/registration,etc. are the top three, only 40% of responders said page load times were a factor.
I agree with your points.
As far as the questions go, if you download the whitepaper http://www.akamai.com/dl/reports/Site_Abandonment_ Final_Report.pdf [may require 'registration'] you will see that the questions aren't poorly written. For example, the main point of this survery, "Which of the following factors are most influential in your decision to continue shopping with an online store where you have shopped in the past? (Select all that apply.)" This question included 13 possible responses including "Site is easy to navigate", "Page loads quickly", "Personalized e-mail offers" and others.
The real problem with this report is that it ignores the actual findings like the fact that navigation is most important to users and load times is down at 8.
While this could be true, it is also possible to write a law along the lines of the sexual harassment laws that could prevent this.
Now, while I don't trust my government enough to turn over my security and well being to them completely, I do want it to work in my best interest. The only way I can ensure that my voice is being heard is to make sure the vote entered in the record is the vote I placed. With all the bugs and shinanegans (pardon spelling) going on with elections, both electronic and paper, a method for voters to verify their votes should be put in place.
Since there is no way to put in such a system without allowing someone else to, either through subterfuge or coercion, see how you voted the only resonable thing to do would be to put laws in place to discourage those acts.
Slashdot Mirror
Since when does being a non-profit organization prevent something from being "name brand"? The Red Cross is as high up on brand recognition as you can get, and its an NPO. Firefox has more name recognition than Opera, thus it is a name brand. Opera is a well recognized name in web tech circles, but you have a lower chance of finding a random Joe Shmo on the street that recognizes that name vs. Firefox. This is not a bash on Opera by any means, I am more often turned off by brand name hype.
Yes actually. For the amount of money MS puts into political campaigns, it doesn't surprise me in the least.
I downloaded and read the whitepaper that is linked from that article. The summary is an obvious skewing of the actual findings to focus on Akamai's business. A couple key examples are: "Which of the following factors are most influential in your decision to continue shopping with an online store where you have shopped in the past? (Select all that apply.)" - 65% said good navigation, page load time was 8th of 13 with only 40%. "Typically, how long are you willing to wait for a single Web page to load before leaving the Web site? (Select one.)" - 21% said 3 - 4 seconds, however 30% were willing to give the page 5 - 6 seconds (broadband numbers) and another 38% were willing to wait more than 6 seconds.
This was the main finding of the survey actually. Because it was produced by Akamai however, they ignored the top 7 reasons customers leave a site or won't come back, to focus on #8 - site load times. Navigation, security, and easy checkout/registration,etc. are the top three, only 40% of responders said page load times were a factor.
I agree with your points. As far as the questions go, if you download the whitepaper http://www.akamai.com/dl/reports/Site_Abandonment_ Final_Report.pdf [may require 'registration'] you will see that the questions aren't poorly written. For example, the main point of this survery, "Which of the following factors are most influential in your decision to continue shopping with an online store where you have shopped in the past? (Select all that apply.)" This question included 13 possible responses including "Site is easy to navigate", "Page loads quickly", "Personalized e-mail offers" and others.
The real problem with this report is that it ignores the actual findings like the fact that navigation is most important to users and load times is down at 8.
While this could be true, it is also possible to write a law along the lines of the sexual harassment laws that could prevent this.
Now, while I don't trust my government enough to turn over my security and well being to them completely, I do want it to work in my best interest. The only way I can ensure that my voice is being heard is to make sure the vote entered in the record is the vote I placed. With all the bugs and shinanegans (pardon spelling) going on with elections, both electronic and paper, a method for voters to verify their votes should be put in place.
Since there is no way to put in such a system without allowing someone else to, either through subterfuge or coercion, see how you voted the only resonable thing to do would be to put laws in place to discourage those acts.