Category Archives: Uncategorized

How Online Shoppers Make Their Purchasing Decisions

Hi all, I’m Stacy General, online personal shopper for PayPal.  A recent study by The Nielsen Company provides some interesting insights on how online shoppers are making their purchasing decisions.  According to the survey, one-third of global Internet users and half of North Americans mainly shop at online-only retailers.  Based on these findings, it looks like more Internet users are embracing the convenience of online shopping, which is great news for us, especially as we continue to provide you all with a safe and easy shopping environment.

 The study also revealed that online shoppers rely greatly on the reviews of their peers when making shopping decisions.  Nearly 60 percent of online shoppers said they consult reviews prior to purchasing consumer electronics and 40 percent of online shoppers claimed that they would not even buy electronics without seeking reviews about the product online first.  It appears that the e-commerce community is eager to share their thoughts on products, especially if it’s a negative one – more than 41 percent of global shoppers say that they would be more likely to share a negative opinion on a product via Twitter or by writing a review online.

Here at PayPal, it is encouraging to see this growth and solidarity among the global online community.  As a leader in online payments, we’re constantly searching for new ways to host a safe and easy shopping experience, which is obviously critical since it looks like an increasing amount of shopping is done online.

We’d love to hear your thoughts on where online shopping is going and how you participate – what websites do you read for reviews before making that next online purchase?

 

Google: Flash stays on YouTube, and here’s why • by The Register

Google has confirmed that Adobe Flash will continue to “play a critical role” on YouTube, saying the fledgling HTML5 video tag doesn’t meet the site’s needs.

“It’s important to understand what a site like YouTube needs from the browser in order to provide a good experience for viewers as well as content creators,” reads a Tuesday blog post from YouTube software engineer John Harding. “We need to do more than just point the browser at a video file like the image tag does — there’s a lot more to it than just retrieving and displaying a video.”

For more than a year, Google has publicly backed HTML5 and other web standards as the future of computing applications. Since January, the company has offered an “experimental” HTML5 player on the site. And it’s now encoding videos with its newly open sourced WebM codec, designed to be a royalty-free means of encoding video for use with the HTML5 video tag. But Harding makes it clear that Google has no intention of pulling Flash from the site anytime soon.

The primary problem with HTML5 video, Harding says, is that browser makers have yet to agree on a standard codec. Though Google, Opera, and Mozilla are firmly behind WebM — based on VP8 codec Google acquired when it purchased video compression outfit On2 Technologies — it seems that Apple and Steve Jobs have no intention of making the switch from H.264, the patent-backed codec licensed by the MPEG LA. Meanwhile, Microsoft is sticking with H.264 on its upcoming IE9, though the company says it will allow surfers to use WebM if they install it on their own machines.

Apple and Microsoft are both members of the H.264 patent pool, and the MPEG LA has indicated it intends to create a new patent pool that would attempt to license WebM, challenging Google’s efforts to make it royalty-free.

As the two camps battle it out, YouTube will continue to use … H.264. This is the codec that backs Flash video, and YouTube has been encoding in H.264 since 2007. “First and foremost, we need all browsers to support a standard video format. Users upload 24 hours of video every minute to YouTube, so it’s important to minimize the number of video formats we support,” Harding writes.

“Concerns about patents and licensing have prevented some browsers from supporting H.264; this in turn has prevented the HTML5 spec from requiring support for a standard format. We believe the web needs an open video format option. One that not only helps address the licensing concerns, but is also optimized for the unique attributes of serving video on the web. To that end, we’re excited about the new WebM project.”

Er, well, this we knew.

Google could surely advance the WebM cause by switching YouTube to the format entirely and moving the site to HTM5. But Harding says the company is unwilling to do so, thanks to several limitations with the <video> tag. HTML5, Harding says, is limited when it comes to DRM, full-screen video, or camera and microphone access. Plus, it can’t do “robust video streaming.”

“As we’ve been expanding into serving full-length movies and live events, it also becomes important to have fine control over buffering and dynamic quality control,” Harding says. “Flash Player addresses these needs by letting applications manage the downloading and playback of video via Actionscript in conjunction with either HTTP or the RTMP video streaming protocol. The HTML5 standard itself does not address video streaming protocols.”

And it doesn’t allow users to easily lift video from YouTube and embed it in other sites. “Flash Player’s ability to combine application code and resources into a secure, efficient package has been instrumental in allowing YouTube videos to be embedded in other web sites,” Harding continues.

“Web site owners need to ensure that embedded content is not able to access private user information on the containing page, and we need to ensure that our video player logic travels with the video (for features like captions, annotations, and advertising). While HTML5 adds sandboxing and message-passing functionality, Flash is the only mechanism most web sites allow for embedded content from other sites.”

Meanwhile, Steve Jobs has banned Adobe Flash from the iPhone, the iPod touch, and the iPad, while publicly badmouthing the technology. And given its ongoing need for Flash, Google is working to cement the platform’s position on other devices. Google’s Chrome browser now includes a built-in Flash plug-in that automatically updates with new versions, and the company is now including the player with its Android mobile OS.

You could argue that Google’s ongoing Flash support will hamper the progress of HTML5. But at least for the moment, Mountain View is intent on playing both sides. “We’re very happy to see such active and enthusiastic discussion about evolving web standards — YouTube is dependent on browser enhancement in order for us to improve the video experience for our users,” Harding concludes.

“While HTML5’s video support enables us to bring most of the content and features of YouTube to computers and other devices that don’t support Flash Player, it does not yet meet all of our needs. Today, Adobe Flash provides the best platform for YouTube’s video distribution requirements, which is why our primary video player is built with it.” ®

 

China gets own-character domains

Chinese children using computers

Chinese people should soon find it easier to browse the web as domain names written in Chinese win approval.

Net address overseer Icann has approved the creation of domains that use only Chinese characters.

The decision builds on earlier work to create internationalised domain names (IDNs) using with non-Latin characters.

The first IDNs were for Arabic scripts and Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were the first to register domains using them.

Icann said firms in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan would soon be issuing domains for people and organisations within their countries that are written with all Chinese scripts.

“One fifth of the world speaks Chinese and that means we just increased the potential online accessibility for roughly a billion people,” said Icann head Rod Beckstrom in a statement.

He said the decision goes some way towards addressing the contradiction that 60% of the net’s users are non-native English speakers yet the dominant language online is English.

This is because when the domain name system was set up addresses, such as the familiar .com and .uk, were written only with Latin characters.

Workarounds for this have been developed which mix Latin and native character sets. Mr Beckstrom said many years of work by the Internet Engineering Task Force had made it possible to use domains written completely in one text.

Icann said that IDNs in 20 languages were being prepared with Thai and Tamil expected to follow soon.

News about the decision was released at the 38th international Icann meeting held in Brussels from 20-25 June.

At the same meeting the .xxx domain, which will cater to pornographic websites, also won approval.

 

Business Link website costs £35m to run / £2.15 per visitor

 

The Business Link website costs £2.15 per visitor, it has been revealed, as the government announces plans to close up to 75% of publicly funded sites in an effort to save millions of pounds.

According to a report by the Central Office of Information, the running of 46 government websites cost £94m plus £32m in staffing costs in 2009/10.

The most expensive was BusinessLink.gov.uk, which provides advice to small companies, at a cost of £35.78m. That equates to £2.15 per visit. The UK Trade and Invest website cost much less at £4.7m but attracted only 399,501 users representing £11.78 per visit.

Following the findings, ministers said they intend to axe up to three quarters of the total 820 government-funded sites and force those that remain to reduce costs by 50%.

Shocking!

#Facebook Advertising Best Practices: #CPC v. #CPM #Analysis via @dddmarketing

When buying ads on Facebook, which model gets you the best return on your advertising spend? In an effort to develop Facebook advertising strategies, many internet marketing experts have postulated the best way to buy advertising on Facebook. Some have argued for CPC ads, some have argued for CPM ads. Either way, these arguments were backed up with very little solid data and as such, have questionable validity. To help explore which method is truly optimal, we conducted a test in order to provide some hard data behind our recommendation.

 

 

Based on our analysis, we found somewhat mixed results. The CPC buy had a higher CTR, lower CPC, and higher percentage of unique impressions while only performing slightly worse than the CPM buy in terms of CPM. Overall, when comparing the CPC and CPM methods of buying on Facebook, for the same budget the CPC campaign ads were shown to 50% more unique people and generated 150% more clicks. The CPM buy did get more impressions overall for the budget, but it seemed to fall short by every other measure. Because of this, we conclude that the data indicates that CPC is the preferred way to buy ads on Facebook for the majority of advertisers.

Download the full report here: Facebook Advertising Best Practices: CPC vs. CPM Buys