April 2006 Penetration Stats available — Flash Player 8 at 69.3%

Updated NPD results are up, and Flash Player tested at 69.3% penetration for the April 2006 study.

The study tests the percent of people that can view of SWF of a specific version. So, if you want to know what the penetration of a specific version, it is the delta between two columns.

For example: the percent of people who can view (up to) v8 content is 69.3%, which is the same as saying they have Flash Player 8 installed. The percent of people who can view up to v7 content is 94.8%, which is the same as saying (94.8% – 69.3% =) 25.5% have Flash Player 7 installed. And so on.

Unfortunately, due to some data collection issues the Shockwave Player data is not available for this quarter. We will resume the stats with next quarter’s study.

21 Responses to April 2006 Penetration Stats available — Flash Player 8 at 69.3%

  1. mauviere says:

    SVG penetration stats look more and more strange in NPD survey (http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/tech_breakdown.html), 9.3 % in april 2006. Is that really reliable ?

  2. Miles says:

    Many thanks for the update Emmy. I subscribed to your blog quite some time ago specifically in order to be alerted as to when these figures became available. So thanks.The figures are really encouraging. How does this rate of take-up for Flash 8 compare with previous versions? Have the Auto Update and Express Install features helped?

  3. emmy says:

    mauviere — you’re right. 9.3% is out of the +/-2% error margin (last result was 12.3%). I would have to look at the actual results more carefully to see what factors might have influenced the lower, off-trend number for SVG. But, the rest of the numbers are on target with the trend of the previous studies.miles — Flash Player 8 was the first time we turned on the auto-update notification, and it definitely had an impact on the rapid adoption of the new player. In the first three months post launch, we were already at 45% penetration. This was 50% faster than the adoption of v6 and v7 at roughly the same point. To compare to this same point (two quarters since release), Flash Player 6 and 7 were at 53% and 52.5% penetration, respectively.Adoption follows a (pretty reliable) curve, and the rate slows as we reach higher penetration. While we are still faster than the v6 and v7 trends at this point, historically it took 5 to 6 quarters to go from 85% penetration to 95%. It is still a little early for me to guess whether we will hit the same type of slow down at 85% or if we’ll continue our faster adoption trend. One reason why we would suddenly flatten out and return to historical adoption at the higher penetration level is if the trend is influenced by factors out of our control — such as new PC adoption/refresh rates.best,e

  4. barry.b says:

    > 69.3% penetration for the April 2006 study.and with FP9 just around the corner, FP8 probably won’t ever get to 85+%, will it?I realise that FP9 is very welcomed for Flex developers et al, but do you think there’s a risk of “too many versions too quickly”? it would be a shame to cop any backlash…

  5. mikem says:

    You will have difficulty of achieving a 95% penetration of Flash Player 8 as you haven’t released a linux version. Since you plan on delivering a linux version of FP9 some time after the windows and mac release, flash authors should develop vor FP7 since some time after the FP9 linux release, if they care about a 95% rate.I do not completely get it why you skip FP8 for linux. If you aim at 95% or higher than there was no point at releasing a windows and a mac version of FP8. You will not get 95% for FP8. Ever. (Only by installations of FP9). So why the hassle of developing FP8 for windows and mac in the first place?

  6. mikem says:

    The missing FP8 for linux also means that it makes no sense for developers to upgrade to Flash Basic 8 or Flash Professional 8. Just stay at Flash Basic 7 or Flash Professional 7 and wait with the upgrade for version 9. This saves you money as you cannot develop for Flash Player 8 until the linux version of Flash Player 9 is released anyway.

  7. scall says:

    The sad fact of the matter is content providers are happily leaving Linux users in the dust once again.There are a growing number of flash 8 only sites.It’s only a matter of time until the utter lockout of non M$ approved clients is complete.

  8. DarkMageZ says:

    if they fail to release flash 9 for linux within an appropriate timeframe, then the opensource community will finally get the hint that macromedia/adobe don’t care. they will start seriously recommending to people to avoid using flash and use something appropriate like java.ps, where do i sign up for alpha testing flash 9 for linux? (since obviously the beta isn’t available)

  9. Miles says:

    Hi Emmy,Another question for you… I’m currently incorporating these latest figures into a presentation I’m preparing intended to empower our sales and accounts people to argue the case to clients for pushing a Flash 8 solution (as if Filters, Blends, Alpha Video, and all the other new features isn’t enough of a reason!).One obstacle I’m coming up against is the consideration for users in a corporate environment who don’t have admin rights on their machines and are stuck on Flash 7.My question is, how does the Express Install feature work in such a situation? Are users without admin rights still able to install Flash 8 via this mechanic. And will it still be Player 8 the next time they log in?

  10. Lars says:

    Hello Emmy,I’m writing with another request not to ditch Linux users. Linux is becoming increasingly pervasive in the corporate world; I’m responsible for hundreds of Linux workstations at my job. People are starting to complain loudly, and my only answer for them at the moment is, “It’s Adobe’s fault.” That wouldn’t look very good on a record of Adobe’s customer satisfaction.Adobe’s push to increase the usage of the latest Flash while letting the Linux player lag is starting to shut us out of the Web. This is made even worse by the Flash specification’s license, disallowing open-source developers from using it to develop compatible Flash players. I’ve heard that the clause is there to prevent splintering of Flash, but until we hear some kind of update about a newer Flash plugin for Linux, an open-source player is the only hope we have.I think it’s great that Flash has been provided for Linux in the past, and for that reason I wasn’t _too_ disturbed by the overwhelming popularity of a proprietary technology on the Web. However, with this long and mysterious delay on a newer Flash plugin, people like me can’t be blamed for thinking our gravest concerns are coming true. We are, like it or not, at the mercy of Adobe.Could we please have some update–any update–on the progress of a newer Flash plugin for Linux?Thanks,-lars

  11. Matt says:

    I’m also disappointed that there still isn’t a newer Linux version. I’ve been waiting patiently but it’s getting to the point that it’s a serious inconvenience because of the increasing uptake of SWF8. Many web developers that I talk to haven’t realised that there’s limited platform support for it.From your previous comments, I understand that Adobe aims to avoid fragmenting the player market. But the lack of a player from Adobe is *forcing* people to expend effort towards developing an alternative player (i.e. gnash). Due to the absurd restrictions on the specification, some reverse engineering is necessary, which is just going to cause more compatibility headaches in the long term.I understand that Adobe may not see commercial value to providing timely updates for minority platforms. However, Adobe should co-operate with third parties to make sure that their players are compatible, at least in terms of releasing specifications under an appropriate licence. This has worked fine for PostScript and PDF, I don’t see why SWF should be any different.Look at it this way: just about every proprietary format and protocol has been reverse engineered, and most of them poorly, with compatibility headaches (think MS Office documents for example). On the other hand, support for open formats such as PDF is generally good. Why not go down the latter path?I imagine that platform support will become more and more of an issue in the future, as more embedded devices become capable of displaying rich Web content including Flash. This again will force third parties to develop alternative players. It is unlikely that Adobe will be able to control this market.Matt

  12. emmy says:

    barry b.”and with FP9 just around the corner, FP8 probably won’t ever get to 85+%, will it?I realise that FP9 is very welcomed for Flex developers et al, but do you think there’s a risk of “too many versions too quickly”? it would be a shame to cop any backlash…”Actually, as with other Flash Player versions, it will continue to grow. Remember, the test asks if you can play a particular SWF version to represent player version. So if you have Flash Player 9 installed, you can view SWF 5 – 9. Which means you still count as being able to view SWF 8. The actual installed percentage of each version is found by calculating the delta between the version you care about and the one after it.Miles -Express Install also requires admin rights. Flash Player, because of where it installs, requires admin rights. However, we do provide installers for intranet redistribution through the free licensing program at http://www.adobe.com/licensing/distribution. We have EXE, MSI, MSM and DMG installers available.Also, I posted an update about the Linux Player today ;-)best,e

  13. Zac says:

    Maybe if you supported linux with the latest versions, then the numbers might be up a bunch.

  14. chris says:

    I am an avid Linux user. The only thing compromising my happiness right now is lack of macromedia 8 support. This makes me very sad. I will not stop using Linux. Since I have an older PC, using wine to invoke a windows version of firefox in order to view the latest content is not really a viable option because of speed issues. Please let me know how I can get on Alpha or Beta testing as well.Thank you.

  15. bk says:

    Someone tell me, what is the real-world percentage of Linux users out there in terms of all users? Is this percentage growing or getting smaller?

  16. Charlie Skinner says:

    Are there any statistics available for Flash Player 8 penetration amongst corporate users?

  17. emmy says:

    Charlie,We looked into this, and the issue is that there isn’t a way to get a good representative sample of “all” corporations. So, it is not that simple. Then one has to start asking “of what corporate users? What type of corporations? what industries? what countries?”The internet households sample (current study) is balanced against the census, and is something that research companies track. An similar one for enterprises, while theoretically possible, would be a very expensive study to run.One thing the current survey does do is ask whether a user is taking it from a work or home PC. So, in that specific case, it is possible to report (and the distinction is important) the percentage of users *within the study participants* that were at work and what the penetration is amongst those people. But what we could not do, is project that to represent all enterprises (whatever definition of enterprises we are trying to project to).e

  18. Dan says:

    Hi,I read someone here talking about subscribing to this blog, but didn’t find the link to do so.Could you please point it out for me ?Thanks

  19. Homer says:

    Many (new) websites still use Flash 7, perhaps because Flash 8 is known to cause problems, possibly because it makes Linux users complain.Adobe is making a mistake in thinking that they can ignore this “non-paying” sector of the market. They should realize that they can no longer ignore this sector, because it is in effect holding back the “paying” sector as well.I strongly suggest for Adobe to not be such a “Microsoft shop” (and Mac shop), and code their stuff in a portable form. There are lots of portable coding techniques, and there is no excuse for Adobe’s developers to adopt and look further than their nose (Visual Studio).

  20. SUB says:

    I think ALL of Linux and UNIX users want new flash-plugin but this player is still absent.I think this problem in new owner of Macromedia called Adobe. What can you say me now? What can you recomend me to use for accessing Flash contents under Linux/IRIX/AIX/Solaris/FreeBSD/OpenBSD ?These operating systems have internet browsers too. :-)These operating systems have identical graphics replacement for visualisation called X11.Where programmers which write flash-plugin for Flash 7? Why these programmers cannot work for us?

  21. Ron says:

    I need a current Flash player for Solaris SPARC and x86).Every copy of Solaris faithfully sports a Adobe logo so it seesm only fair to give us some consideration.While you at it can you tell me why there is only Arcobat 4 for Solaris x86.