Return on Investment
Posted in Web strategy on: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 by Paul Boag
Recently a listener of my podcast wrote to me complaining that a recent screencast I did on the business benefits of web standards, didn’t work under Linux because it used Flash 8. This raised an interesting question. Do I care?
You see my problem is that I am obsessed with return on investment at the moment. It’s my pet subject and I find myself examining everything within this context. If a web design decision cannot demonstrate a business benefit then it probably isn’t worth doing. So, when I received the email mentioning the problem in Linux I couldn’t help wondering whether it was a problem worth fixing.
My logic went something like this:
I used an automated tool called Camtasia to produce the screencast and that generated the flash file for me. Other than the time involved in preparing and recording the screencast very little investment was spent.
The resulting screencast has proved extremely popular hitting the front page of digg.com and increasing my own exposure and that of my web design agency. In short it was a useful marketing tool, as well as a good way to promote the benefits of web standards. Win, win.
Because accessibility is important to me and because I wanted the presentation to be available to as many people as possible I produced it in four formats:
Now admittedly it could do with an HTML version and I am working on that. However, generally speaking I thought I had made the effort.
So when I received the request for a Flash 7 version compatible with Linux, I had to consider if the additional work was justified. Unfortunately I had a problem.
I couldn’t find a quick automated method of producing the screencasts in Flash 7 format. Sure it could be done, but was the additional work justified from a business perspective.
If the presentation was a marketing tool then I had to ask myself whether building a Linux version would expose my presentation to anymore of my target audience. Well, obviously the people that buy my services aren’t other web designers but rather website owners. Do that many website owners really access websites from the Linux platform? My feeling was that the additional work wouldn’t generate sufficient additional leads to make it worth the while.
Of course, I had to consider secondary factors too. Would the absence of a Linux version adversely affect how people perceived my work? Possibly. Would it affect how I was perceived by potential clients? Probably not.
In the end I decided not to rework the screencast to support Flash 7.
You have probably guessed by now that I am exaggerating to make a point. Before we add new functionality to our sites we need to ask ourselves; will it pay for itself?
Obviously, the stuff I produce on this site is more than a marketing tool to me (although it does fulfil that role too). However, the point remains.
So what do you think? Did I make the wrong decision in not supporting Linux users? Does a moral obligation outweigh business considerations?
21 Comments
Comments are for the discussion of this post. If you have other questions / comments then post them to the forum or send me an email
You can’t please everyone. Don’t feel too bad about the whole situation. I think having a Audio file, PDF, and Powerpoint is plenty good enough for those who can’t view flash 8 files.
The choice is appearent, you provided a pdf,powerpoint, and audio. Thats more then accesable, plus your adding a html version. Considering this presentation is for site owners, and the relavance of a site owner using linux, should really worry about this then. Why? Why would a linux not be use to being left out of the loop? Even better, why would a linux user be lazy enough to need a flash version. Why would a linux user, be a site owner and not know about web standards?
Even if you really want to target them, encoding the video in a different format, should make everyone, who hates flash, happy.
Part of building accessible websites is providing alternative ways of accessing the content. By having a PDF, Powerpoint, and Audio file, you did just that. I dont see how there is any way to complain about the material you provided. Keep up the good work and thanks for a great podcast, you can’t please everyone, it’s ok.
I can understand your reluctance for re-creating your content for a Linux Desktop. It isn’t your fault that anything past Flash 7 isn’t yet supported in Linux (yes, I’m talking to you Adobe!) and, as you mentioned, the number of your visitors is probably not a linux-based audience.
Flash 9 support for Linux is near its release so it shouldn’t be much longer before the issue will solve itself. Most everything else is already compatible, this is one of the only issues that creeps up for Desktop Linux users.
I am a webmaster and seo consultant. I use linux on my laptop, home desktop & servers. It is growing quite rapidly and into the future will be harder to ignore. As I mentioned above, however, it has always been a priority of Linux to co-exist and be compatible with other systems. Before long you’ll start seeing more of you logs showing Linux as the visitor OS.
Until then, keep making your content, we’re not far behind you.
Which Linux users?
As a Linux user, I do not mean that in a derogatory way. Those using Linux the 64 bit version can not access flash content at all (unless they install a sperate 32bit browser).
Using Flash is going to restrict access by some people, eg Linux Users, Mac Os9 Users (also stuck on ver 7), behind certain Government firewalls (they block swf files) and people with visual impairments (unless of course you take the time to make it accessible).
I would argue you have a moral obligation to make content accessible in some alternative format where possible. Which you have done.
But to make a special version for those people stuck with flash 7, not unless there will be a return on your investment
It’s certainly not a ‘moral’ issue. If people want to use linux then thats up to them – i dont agree that your not supporting linux users – im sure linux supports one of the other formats you have produced so the content is accessible. If you catered to every possible configuration for every possible means there would be a list a mile long. By producing the four you have covered probably 95% if all people – perfectly acceptable.
Had the presentation been about anything other than web standards then perhaps your decision not to support Linux would have been reasonable. As it is, in this case I feel that you should have been led by your sense of irony, rather than concerns about business benefit.
Your frontpage says “We ensure all our sites are accessible to the widest possible audience”. If you design a site for a client that includes screencasts as part of the functionality will you recommend Camtasia to the client as the tool for the job, knowing that the results will exclude Linux users at the moment?
Re-phrase the question as “would you recommend an ActiveX component as a solution to a problem knowing that it would exclude all non-IE users?”
In other words, given the lack of current linux support, can Flash 8 really be considered a web standard?
I think you have produced more than enough different versions Paul.
As Boovio said, surely within all the available formats, one will be suitable for linux people.
Re return on investment, I think this is a difficult one.
What you do through boagworld is providing a source of information for people, now I don’t think you can really price this therefore it will be difficult to evaluate (exactly) the cost against the returns..? I suppose you can count the amount of hours you put in but then when creating your content you are learning new skills, meeting new people etc which in itself is a return…
I’m not sure the return on investment is applicable to boagworld and If you start thinking this way you might spoil it for yourself..? what do you think?
I understand you need to get something back from this but I think you might be getting more on a personal level than you realise…
Sure, if the objective was to sell your services then statistically the amount of potential clients using Linux and no other platform is virtually nil – and as you allude to – at some point catering for everybody becomes simply unsustainable.
If the objective was to promote the use of Web Standards amongst a general audience that includes the developer community, then it’s not quite so clear cut. A sizeable percentage of programmers that I deal with prefer Linux as their platform of choice – so that muddys the water. And to be fair there are SWF to FLA converters available that would allow you to import into Flash and within two clicks export as Flash 7 – so the time issue isn’t such a big problem either (although that works for them too).
Ultimately I guess I would square it by saying that as you provided multiple alternatives to the Flash (including an Audio Podcast which is accessible to all but the deaf!), and links to other resources, you have done all that can be reasonably expected to make it as accessible as possible.
I think sooner or later the law of diminishing returns kicks in. OK, you might opt to cater for a type of user that given you 1,000 hits per month, what about the 500’s? what about that serious oddball on a C64 with some text browser who gives you a couple of hits a month?
You need to draw a line in the sand and decide how valuable your time is and how much effort is required to cover each given type of user and stick to the conclusion.
There is also a level of effort required by the user too. If you buy in to Linux, you also buy in to certain limitations and responsabilities as a user. If you can work around those by running Firefox under Wine then you should do so.
Why can’t they listen to the mp3 while flicking through the PDF?
In most cases that I’ve heard of (which is quite a few), those who use Linux or any other Unix based system tend to be the more “hardcore” of computer users. They also tend to have multiple machines, one of which at a guess I would say is on an OS which can read files.
If that’s not the case for any of the listeners, my appologies, but otherwise they can just use another machine!
Debating the relative “worth” of users is unfortunate but necessary when it comes to the web. Although it can sound callous to suggest you simply don’t care about a particular user group, I agree with Paul.
Christer makes an excellent point – in this case it’s actually Adobe who has demonstrated this pragmatic approach by not supporting Flash 8 on Linux.
if u went to all the trouble of making it in four formats, why not make one of them compatable with linux (not counting audio) ..
if i visit a site and cant access the content the chances are ill never return.
sorry,
what i mean to say is that site content should idealy be displayed on the page, rather than in a file that i have to download and open to access it (who wants to look at a pdf or power point presentation). the point is to be able to easily access the information within your page isnt it..
i hate not being able to access content on a site because i dont have the latest and greatest version of flash.
if you are concerned with accessibility you have to make it accessible to linux too.
Linux is a funny thing. I currently am the only one in a medium size company that runs Linux. I in no way expect anybody in my company to change the way that they do their work (Exchange, Word, or PowerPoint) to suit my Linux needs. I am 1% of the company and I would be willing to guess that if you look at your web stats that > less then 2% of your visitors are running on Linux also. It is up to me to use tools like OpenOffice, Wine, CrossOver, and even VMware to get some of my tasks done when I need to. Accessibility is one thing being pragmatic is another, I understand that I am alienating myself from the rest of the company with my choice of Linux, it is not the company alienating me by not reverting to using notepad for all company communications.
As a Mac user I do empathise with the Linux users’ feeling of being left out at times. Not that Mac users are left out much these days due to some changes in thinking and good luck at Cupertino, but I guess if it hadn’t been for those big hitters like Adobe and even Microsoft “adopting” the Mac platform in the early years, Mac would still be a minority in every respect and users would still be hunting around for software scraps.
So maybe boagworld, in its quest to be a big hitter, should adopt a more Linux friendly approach. That extra work could be a great investment for when Linux does take over the world and they all cite you as their guru. That is only good advice though, if you are still a relatively young man and plan to stay around for a long time!
Had you thought about breaking the podcast into chapters and having the logo change as they do on the Stuff magazine podcast?
Not sure how they do that… might set it as a task to find out.
I emailed Paul about this on Monday. There were a couple of reasons for my email.
Firstly, I was dissapointed to find I couldn’t watch the presentation as a linux user (it was only afterwards that I realised the video element was just a slideshow as opposed to real video).
Secondly I hadn’t realised that this presentation was more aimed at website owners and people who currently don’t have a good understanding of web standards. This in itself I think diminishes the need a little for linux compatability (although not entirely).
Either way, the flash 9 beta version for linux was released today, I’ve installed it and it the presentation worked fine, so this will quickly becominng a non issue.
I didnt mean my email to come across as a complaint, just an alert to an accessibility issue that I wasn’t sure that Paul was aware of.
Just to be clear, I really enjoy the podcast, hence my initial dissapointment
Graham
My initial reaction to this post was that it was a little arrogant, but this subsided. I understand that you have made the content available in other formats, and I can see that there would be a lot of work to convert the Flash file from 8 to 7, if that is even directly possible, without rerecording.
I am though still surprised by it. It would almost be like me saying “You test in Firefox? Why? 95% of users have access to Internet Explorer! Even if they insist on not using IE they can still kinda view my sites anyway!” – of course that statement does not represent me. I am writing this comment on Mac OS X and the website renders beautifully in Safari, so why would you lower your own personal standards when dealing with content for another/sub platform?
Besides, isn’t this the exact reason you don’t like Flash :P
Thanks for the great work on the podcast.
Jason.
Hi Graham,
Its okay Graham. I didnt take offense. Your request just got me thinking is all. I guess it was like a maths exam… I felt a need to show my workings :)