04-06-2004, 11:00 PM
|
|
Magi
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,186
|
|
RealNetworks: Rethinking Aggressive Marketing Tactics?
 RealNetworks is apparently feeling the pressure from Windows Media Player. After years of alienating customers with aggressive marketing tactics, they're now trying to play nice in an attempt to regain some market share and consumer good will. According to a Wired article, "RealNetworks hasn't been doing itself any favors with its affinity for pop-up ads, icon installations throughout users' computers and aggressive (and sometimes misleading) pitches for subscription products, analysts say. Instead of developing user-friendly products, RealNetworks has been focused on getting as much money as possible from users with each registration.
By most accounts, the player itself isn't a bad product. The latest version, Real Player 10, supports every major media format and more than 50 portable media devices, including the iPod. It also includes an integrated online music store, called Rhapsody. The registration process could be easier, however.
"I think they are shooting themselves in the foot in terms of the registration process," said design expert Jakob Nielsen. "You click on 'free' and you see costs. That's a very classic thing called bait and switch. Bait and switch really annoys people."
Real Networks representatives say that their newest software is "kinder, friendlier, easier", and they've also attempted to update their download page to make it easier for people to find what they want.
I've had RealPlayer installed on my system several times over the last few years, and I've always ended up removing it. The last time was several months ago, when I tried to install RealPlayer so I could watch a clip on the BBC news site. 30 minutes later, I was still working through the registration process and reading the reams of fine print to see if I was agreeing to things that I'd later regret. When I finally got through, I found seemingly unremovable icons in several places on my desktop, and I spent another 30 minutes wiping it from my system and chopping off all of the tentacles. :evil: At this point, they'd have to pay me (and not a small amount) to install their player, no matter how hard they've tried to make amends. What do you think?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:10 PM
|
|
Pupil
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 26
|
|
I agree completely, RealPlayer (before Real One) was excellent. The subsequent problem was that you couldn't even use RealPlayer anylonger as it kept asking you to upgrade to Real One.
iTunes is now my favourite, excellent in all respects except that WMP can be docked to a toolbar on the the taskbar.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:17 PM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 54
|
|
This is why I stopped using Real a long time ago. I just can't understand why the European Commission is punishing Microsoft for delivering WMP with Windows. At least now most news sites support both Real and WMP video clips but that's only after WMP got a large user base (BBC is not offering everything in both formats, BTW). Before that, you needed Real + WMP + QuickTime to be sure you could see everything. I'm glad those times have changed!
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:18 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 141
|
|
I also agree, when I want to watch RealPlayer files I use my Pocket PC and the pocket version which doesn't display ads, or keeps telling me to upgrade or have flashing icons in the system tray.
I usually give up when trying to navigate their website. I always seem to end up at a payment page or end up going round in circles.
Why can't the BBC website use a more open format like mpeg or divx?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:25 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 165
|
|
Re: RealNetworks: Rethinking Aggressive Marketing Tactics?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pat Logsdon
At this point, they'd have to pay me (and not a small amount) to install their player, no matter how hard they've tried to make amends. What do you think?
|
Amen!
Real Ads... er, Real Player has no place on my computers or my Pocket PC.
Idealistically, why can't there be a Real Codec, an Quick Time Codec, a DiVX/XViD Codec, and a Windows Media Codec, in addition to the standard codecs (.mp2/3, .wav, .au/.aiff, etc.) that are available for ANY player.
Using this model, one could play all media in one unified media player, no need for four (or more). You could pick, for example, WinAmp to play all your media (Real, .QT/.MOV, and WM9, etc.).
Why not? I'm ready to abandon QuickTime. I've already foresaken Real, Windows Media 9 seems to be (technologically) the best of the bunch... but I want a world with choices, not one where my choices are either limited or made for me.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:28 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 238
|
|
I've actually found Real Player 10 to be pretty decent, and I've disliked Real Player for a very long time now. I use it sometimes to transfer files to my Minidisc player (Sonicstage 2.0 for the rest of the time) and it's fairly easy to use. And unlike previous versions, it doesn't try and hijack your file associations.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:31 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 631
|
|
If there is a link and the only option is Real, I just dont' watch/listen. Simple as that. I got tired of it years ago. Quick Time? Love it. WMP for anything QT can't handle.
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:35 PM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 241
|
|
Woo!
Yay for realnetworks getting it straight.
I do hope that they do this right. If it only turns into a half effort, then it is all wasted, but if they throw in the ad-revenue towel, i see bright things in the future for them. 
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:40 PM
|
|
Swami
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,303
|
|
The BBC is the only reason I have Real installed...... :?
|
| |
|
|
|
04-06-2004, 11:44 PM
|
|
Mystic
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,725
|
|
NASA TV is the only "real" reason I have RealPlayer installed. And it was a pain getting it to work. :roll:
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
