In June we included a brief survey on webconferencing-test.com asking for the reasons visitors come to our site, how they got there and if they got what they expected. We have gotten quite a number of responses – thank you all! – and would like to present what our visitors had to say.
Looking at the reasons visitors came to our site revealed the following:
Most visitors (31%) were on the hunt for generic information about web conferencing to get familiar with the technology and different ways of online collaboration. 18% were on the verge of purchasing a solution and checked our site to confirm their buying decision. And we were happy to see that 8% of the visitors were current users of a web conferencing solution seeking tips and tricks on using the software in question. In addition, 21% chose our site to begin their search for a web conferencing solution and 9% were looking for news on the online collaboration market. The remaining 13% had their own reason to visit our site...
Of course we got many suggestions for tools to include in our tests, such as ICU Live! from ICU Global. We always appreciate such hints since the market has expanded greatly and it is impossible to keep track of all online collaboration software. The feedback we got relating to this issue, i.e. that our overview is not complete is correct. But some tools don’t appear on our list for the following reasons:
- Target group: If an online meeting tool vendor requires you to make changes to your IT infrastructure the tool is very likely not for our focus group – small to medium sized businesses or the self-employed – who are best of with ready-to-use solutions.
- Popularity: Finding a tool that works for you is great. But if you are one of the 10 total users it just may not have an appeal for a broader audience and we need to prioritize our resources when it comes to testing.
- Performance: Some tools are simply bad. Full stop. No need to include them in our ranking.
Another bit of feedback was that our pricing info was not detailed enough and that we should incorporate pricing models for more usage scenarios on our site. Availability of pricing information is an important factor for us as we also state in our test approach. That being said there is no way for us to depict all the different usage scenarios that might come into play for the various customers. What we depict is the overall cost model we find on the vendors’ websites and if you have special requirements you will be better of contacting the vendor of your choice directly.
Thanks again to all participants for the helpful feedback. We will continue to try and state all the information on online collaboration tools you might need and appreciate your feedback should we have missed anything.