Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (7484)

• Conversion Rate Optimisation Statistics for 2024 and Beyond

  21 novembre 2023, par Erin — Analytics Tips

  Driving traffic to your website is only half the battle. The real challenge — once you’ve used a web analytics solution to understand how users behave — is turning more of those visitors into customers.

  That doesn’t happen by accident. You need to employ conversion rate optimisation strategies and tools to see even a small lift in conversion rates. The good news is that it doesn’t take much to see massive results. Raising your conversion rate from 1% to 3% can triple your revenue. 

  In even better news, you don’t have to guess at the best ways to improve your conversion rate. We’ve done the hard work and collected the most recent and relevant conversion rate optimisation statistics to help you. 

  General conversion rate optimisation statistics

  It appears the popularity of conversion rate optimisation is soaring. According to data collected by Google Trends, there were more people searching for the term “conversion rate optimization” in September 2023 than ever before. 

  As you can see from the chart below, the term’s popularity is on a clear upward trajectory, meaning even more people could be searching for it in the near future. (Source)

  

  Do you want to know what the average landing page conversion rate is ? According to research by WordStream, the average website conversion rate across all industries is 2.35%. 

  That doesn’t paint the whole picture, however. Better-performing websites have significantly higher conversion rates. The top 25% of websites across all industries convert at a rate of 5.31% or higher. (Source)

  Let’s break things down by industry now. The Unbounce Conversion Benchmark Report offers a detailed analysis of how landing pages convert across various industries.

  First, we have the Finance and Insurance industry, which boasts a conversion rate of 15.6%. 

  On the other end, agencies appears to be one of the worst-performing. Agencies’ landing pages convert at a rate of 8.8%. (Source)

  

  What about the size of the conversion rate optimisation industry ? Given the growth in popularity of the term in Google, surely the industry is experiencing growth, right ?

  You’d be correct in that assumption. The conversion rate optimisation software market was valued at $771.2 million in 2018 and is projected to reach $1.932 billion by 2026 — a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 9.6%.

  Statistics on the importance of conversion rate optimisation

  If you’re reading this article, you probably think conversion rate optimisation is pretty important. But do you know its importance and where it ranks in your competitors’ priorities ? Read on to find out. 

  Bounce rate — the number of people who leave your website without visiting another page or taking action — is the scourge of conversion rate optimisation efforts. Every time someone bounces from your site, you lose the chance to convert them.

  The questions, then, are : how often do people bounce on average and how does your bounce rate compare ? 

  Siege Media analysed over 1.3 billion sessions from a range of traffic sources, including 700 million bounces, to calculate an average bounce rate of 50.9%. (Source)

  

  Bounce rates vary massively from website to website and industry to industry, however. Siege Media’s study unveils an array of average bounce rates across industries :

  • Travel – 82.58%
  • B2B – 65.17%
  • Lifestyle – 64.26%
  • Business and Finance – 63.51%
  • Healthcare – 59.50%
  • eCommerce – 54.54%
  • Insurance – 45.96%
  • Real Estate – 40.78%

  It won’t come as much of a surprise to learn that marketers are determined to reduce bounce rates and improve lead conversion. Today’s marketers are highly performance-based. When asked about their priorities for the coming year, 79% of marketers said their priority was generating quality qualified leads — the most popular answer in the survey. (Source)

  Just because it is a priority for marketers doesn’t mean that everyone has their stuff together. If you have a conversion rate optimisation process in place, you’re in the minority. According to research by HubSpot, less than one in five marketers (17%) use landing page A/B tests to improve their conversion rates. (Source)

  When it comes to personalisation strategies – a common and effective tool to increase conversion rates — the picture isn’t any rosier. Research by Salesforce found just over one-quarter of markets are confident their organisation has a successful strategy for personalisation. (Source)

  Conversion rate optimisation tactics statistics

  There are hundreds of ways to improve your website’s conversion rates. From changing the color of buttons to the structure of your landing page to your entire conversion funnel, in this section, we’ll look at the most important statistics you need to know when choosing tactics and building your own CRO experiments. 

  If you are looking for the best method to convert visitors, then email lead generation forms are the way to go, according to HubSpot. This inoffensive and low-barrier data collection method boasts a 15% conversion rate, according to the marketing automation company’s research. (Source)

  Where possible, make your call-to-actions personalised. Marketing personalisation, whether through behavioral segmentation or another strategy, is an incredibly powerful way of showing users that you care about their specific needs. It’s no great surprise, then, that HubSpot found personalised calls-to-actions perform a whopping 202% better than basic CTAs. (Source)

  If you want to boost conversion rates, then it’s just as important to focus on quantity as well as quality. Yes, a great-looking, well-written landing page will go a long way to improving your conversion rate, but having a dozen of these pages will do even more. 

  Research by HubSpot found companies see a 55% increase in leads when they increase the number of landing pages from 10 to 15. What’s more, companies with over 40 landing pages increase conversion by more than 500%. (Source)

  

  User-generated content (UGC) should also be high on your priority list to boost conversion rates. Several statistics show how powerful, impactful and persuasive social proof like user reviews can be. 

  Research shows that visitors who scroll to the point where they encounter user-generated content increase the likelihood they convert by a staggering 102.4%. (Source)

  Other trust signs can be just as impactful. Research by Trustpilot found that the following four trust signals make consumers more likely to make a purchase when shown on a product page :

  • Positive star rating and reviews (85% more likely to make a purchase)
  • Positive star rating (78%)
  • Positive customer testimonials (82%)
  • Approved or authorised seller badge (76%)

  (Source)

  Showing ratings and reviews has also increased conversion rates by 38% on home appliances and electronics stores. (Source)

  And no wonder, given that consumers are more likely to buy from brands they trust than brands they love, according to the 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer Special Report. (Source) 

  A lack of trust is also one of the top four reasons consumers abandon their shopping cart at checkout. (Source) 

  Traffic source conversion rate statistics

  What type of traffic works the best when it comes to conversions, or how often you should be signing up users to your mailing list ? Let’s look at the stats to find out. 

  Email opt-ins are one of the most popular methods for collecting customer information — and an area where digital marketers spend a lot of time and effort when it comes to conversion rate optimisation. So, what is the average conversion rate of an email opt-in box ?

  According to research by Sumo — based on 3.2 billion users who have seen their opt-in boxes — the average email opt-in rate is 1.95%. (Source)

  Search advertising is an effective way of driving website traffic, but how often do those users click on these ads ?

  WordStream’s research puts the average conversion of search advertising for all industries at 6.11%. (Source)

  The arts and entertainment industry enjoys the highest clickthrough rates (11.78%), followed by sports and recreation (10.53%) and travel (10.03%). Legal services and the home improvement industry have the lowest clickthrough rates at 4.76% and 4.8%, respectively.

  

  If you’re spending money on Google ads, then you’d better hope a significant amount of users convert after clicking them. 

  Unfortunately, conversion rates from Google ads decreased year-on-year for most industries in 2023, according to research by WordStream — in some cases, those decreases were significant. The only two industries that didn’t see a decrease in conversion rates were beauty and personal care and education and instruction. (Source)

  The average conversion rate for search ads across all industries is 7.04%. The animal and pet niche has the highest conversion rate (13.41%), while apparel, fashion and jewelry have the lowest conversion rate (1.57%). (Source)

  What about other forms of traffic ? Well, there’s good reason to try running interstitial ads on smartphone apps if you aren’t already. Ads on the iOS app see a 14.3 percent conversion rate on average. (Source)

  E-commerce conversion rate optimisation statistics (400 words)

  Conversion rate optimisation can be the difference between a store that sets new annual sales records and one struggling to get by. 

  The good news is that the conversion rate among US shoppers was the highest it’s ever been in 2021, with users converting at 2.6%. (Source)

  If you have a Shopify store, then you may find conversion rates a little lower. A survey by Littledata found the average conversion rate for Shopify was 1.4% in September 2022. (Source)

  What about specific e-commerce categories ? According to data provided by Dynamic Yield, the consumer goods category converted at the highest rate in September 2023 (4.22%), a spike of 0.34% from August. 

  Generally, the food and beverage niche boasts the highest conversion rate (4.87%), and the home and furniture niche has the lowest conversion rate (1.44%). (Source)

  If you’re serious about driving sales, don’t focus on mobile devices at the expense of consumers who shop on desktop devices. The conversion rate among US shoppers tends to be higher for desktop users than for mobile users. 

  

  In the second quarter of 2022, for instance, desktop shoppers converted at a rate of 3% on average compared to smartphone users who converted at an average rate of 2%. (Source)

  Increase your conversions with Matomo

  Conversion rate optimisation can help you grow your subscriber list, build your customer base and increase your revenue. Now, it’s time to put what you’ve learned into practice.

  Use the advice above to guide your experiments and track everything with Matomo. Achieve unparalleled data accuracy while harnessing an all-in-one solution packed with essential conversion optimisation features, including Heatmaps, Session Recordings and A/B Testing. Matomo makes it easier than ever to analyse conversion-focused experiments.

  Get more from your conversion rate optimisations by trying Matomo free for 21 days. No credit card required.

• Running Windows XP In 2016

  2 janvier 2016, par Multimedia Mike

  I have an interest in getting a 32-bit Windows XP machine up and running. I have a really good yet slightly dated and discarded computer that seemed like a good candidate for dedicating to this task. So the question is : Can Windows XP still be installed from scratch on a computer, activated, and used in 2016 ? I wasn’t quite sure since I have heard stories about how Microsoft has formally ended support for Windows XP as of the first half of 2014 and I wasn’t entirely sure what that meant.

  Spoiler : It’s still possible to install and activate Windows XP as of the writing of this post. It’s also possible to download and install all the updates published up until support ended.

  The Candidate Computer
  This computer was assembled either in late 2008 or early 2009. It was a beast at the time.

  
  
  Click for a larger image
  

  It was built around the newly-released NVIDIA GTX 280 video card. The case is a Thermaltake DH-101, which is a home theater PC thing. The motherboard is an Asus P5N32-SLI Premium with a Core 2 Duo X6800 2.93 GHz CPU on board. 2 GB of RAM and a 1.5 TB hard drive are also present.

  The original owner handed it off to me because their family didn’t have much use for it anymore (too many other machines in the house). Plus it was really, obnoxiously loud. The noisy culprit was the stock blue fan that came packaged with the Intel processor (seen in the photo) whining at around 65 dB. I replaced the fan and brought the noise level way down.

  As for connectivity, the motherboard has dual gigabit NICs (of 2 different chipsets for some reason) and onboard wireless 802.11g. I couldn’t make the latter work and this project was taking place a significant distance from my wired network. Instead, I connected a USB 802.11ac dongle and antenna which is advertised to work in both Windows XP and Linux. It works great under Windows XP. Meanwhile, making the adapter work under Linux provided a retro-computing adventure in which I had to modify C code to make the driver work.

  So, score 1 for Windows XP over Linux here.

  The Simple Joy of Retro-computing
  One thing you have to watch out for when you get into retro-computing is fighting the urge to rant about the good old days of computing. Most long-time computer users have a good understanding of the frustration that computers keep getting faster by orders of magnitude and yet using them somehow feels slower and slower over successive software generations.
  

  This really hits home when you get old software running, especially on high-end hardware (relative to what was standard contemporary hardware). After I got this new Windows XP machine running, as usual, I was left wondering why software was so much faster a few generations ago.

  Of course, as mentioned, it helps when you get to run old software on hardware that would have been unthinkably high end at the software’s release. Apparently, the minimum WinXP specs as set by MS are a 233 MHz Pentium CPU and 64 MB of RAM, with 1.5 GB of hard drive space. This machine has more than 10x the clock speed (and 2 CPUs), 32x the RAM, and 1000x the HD space. Further, I’m pretty sure 100 Mbit ethernet was the standard consumer gear in 2001 while 802.11b wireless was gaining traction. The 802.11ac adapter makes networking quite pleasant.

  Purpose
  Retro-computing really seems to be ramping up in popularity lately. For some reason, I feel compelled to declare at this juncture that I was into it before it was cool.

  Why am I doing this ? I have a huge collection of old DOS/Windows computer games. I also have this nerdy obsession with documenting old video games in the MobyGames database. I used to do a lot of this a few years ago, tracking the effort on my gaming blog. In the intervening years, I have still collected a lot of old, unused, unloved video games, usually either free or very cheap while documenting my collection efforts on that same blog.

  So I want to work my way through some of this backlog, particularly the games that are not yet represented in the MobyGames database, and even more pressing, ones that the internet (viewed through Google at least) does not seem to know about. To that end, I thought this was a good excuse to get Windows XP on this old machine. A 32-bit Windows XP machine is capable of running any software advertised as supporting Windows XP, Windows ME, Windows 98, Windows 95, and even 16-bit Windows 3.x (I have games for all these systems). That covers a significant chunk of PC history. It can probably be made to run DOS games as well, but those are (usually) better run under DosBox. In order to get the right display feel, I even invested in a (used) monitor sporting a 4:3 aspect ratio. If I know these old games, most will be engineered and optimized for that ratio rather than the widescreen resolutions seen nowadays.

  I would also like to get back to that Xbox optical disc experimentation I was working on a few years ago. Another nice feature of this motherboard is that it still provides a 40-pin IDE/PATA adapter which makes the machine useful for continuing that old investigation (and explains why I have that long IDE cable to no where pictured hanging off the board).

  The Messy Details
  I did the entire installation process twice. The first time was a bumbling journey of discovery and copious note-taking. I still have Windows XP installation media that includes service pack 2 (SP2), along with 2 separate licenses that haven’t been activated for a long time. My plan was to install it fresh, then install the relevant drivers. Then I would investigate the Windows update and activation issues and everything should be fine.

  So what’s the deal with Windows Update for XP, and with activations ? Second item first : it IS possible to still activate Windows XP. The servers are still alive and respond quickly. However, as always, you don’t activate until you’re sure everything is working at some baseline. It took awhile to get there.

  As for whether Windows Update still works for XP, that’s a tougher question. Short answer is yes ; longer answer is that it can be difficult to kick off the update process. At least on SP2, the “Windows Update” program launches IE6 and navigates to a special microsoft.com URL which initiates the update process (starting with an ActiveX control). This URL no longer exists.

  From what I can piece together from my notes, this seems to be the route I eventually took :

  1. Install Windows XP fresh
  2. Install drivers for the hardware ; fortunately, Asus still has all the latest drivers necessary for the motherboard and its components but it’s necessary to download these from another network-connected PC since the networking probably won’t be running “out of the box”
  3. Download the .NET 3.5 runtime, which is the last one supported by Windows XP, and install it
  4. Download the latest NVIDIA drivers ; this needs to be done after the previous step because the installer requires the .NET runtime ; run the driver installer and don’t try to understand why it insists on re-downloading .NET 3.5 runtime before installation
  5. While you’re downloading stuff on other computers to be transported to this new machine, be sure to download either Chrome or Firefox per your preference ; if you try to download via IE6, you may find that their download pages aren’t compatible with IE6
  6. Somewhere along the line (I’m guessing as a side effect of the .NET 3.5 installation), the proper, non-IE6-based Windows Update program magically springs to life ; once this happens, there will be 144 updates (in my case anyway) ; installing these will probably require multiple reboots, but SP3 and all known pre-deprecation security fixes will be installed
  7. Expect that, even after installing all of these, a few more updates will appear ; eventually, you’ll be at the end of the update road
  8. Once you’re satisfied everything is working satisfactorily, take the plunge and activate your installation

  Residual Quirks
  Steam runs great on Windows XP, as do numerous games I have purchased through the service. So that opens up a whole bunch more games that I could play on this machine. Steam’s installer highlights a curious legacy problem of Windows XP– it seems there are many languages that it does not support “out of the box” :

  
  
  

  It looks like the Chinese options and a few others that are standard now weren’t standard 15 years ago.

  Also, a little while after booting up, I’ll get a crashing error concerning a process called geoforms.scr. This appears to be NVIDIA-related. However, I don’t notice anything obviously operationally wrong with the system.

  Regarding DirectX support, DirectX 9 is the highest version officially supported by Windows XP. There are allegedly methods to get DirectX 10 running as well, but I don’t care that much. I did care, briefly, when I realized that a bunch of the demos for the NVIDIA GTX 280 required DX10 which left me wondering why it was possible to install them on Windows XP.

  Eventually, by installing enough of these old games, I fully expect to have numerous versions of .NET, DirectX, QT, and Video for Windows installed side by side.

  Out of curiosity, I tried playing a YouTube HD/1080p video. I wanted to see if the video was accelerated through my card. The video played at full speed but I noticed some tearing. Then I inspected the CPU usage and noticed that the CPU was quite loaded. So either the GTX 280 doesn’t have video acceleration, or Windows XP doesn’t provide the right APIs, or Chrome is not able to access the APIs in Windows XP, or perhaps some combination of the foregoing.

  Games are working well, though. I tried one of my favorite casual games and got sucked into that for, like, an entire night because that’s what casual games do. But then, I booted up a copy of WarCraft III that I procured sometime ago. I don’t have any experience with the WarCraft universe (RTS or MMO) but I developed a keen interest in StarCraft II over the past few years and wanted to try WarCraft III. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get WarCraft III to work correctly on several different Windows 7 installations (movies didn’t play, which left me slightly confused as to what I was supposed to do).

  Still works beautifully on the new old Windows XP machine.

  The post Running Windows XP In 2016 first appeared on Breaking Eggs And Making Omelettes.

• Ode to the Gravis Ultrasound

  1er août 2011, par Multimedia Mike — General

  WARNING : This post is a bunch of nostalgia. Feel free to follow along if you recall the DOS days of the early-mid 1990s.

  I finally let go of my Gravis Ultrasound MAX sound card a little while ago. It felt like the end of an era for me, even though I had scarcely used the card in recent memory.

  
  
  

  The Beginning
  What is the Gravis Ultrasound ? Only the finest PC sound card from the classic DOS days. Back in the day (very early 1990s), most consumer PC sound cards were Yamaha OPL FM synthesizers paired with a basic digital to analog converter (DAC). Gravis, a company known for game controllers, dared to break with the dominant paradigm of Sound Blaster clones and create a sound card that had 32 digital channels.
  
  I heard about the GUS sometime in 1992 through one of the dominant online services at the time, Prodigy. Through the message boards, I learned of a promotion with Electronic Arts in which customers could pre-order a GUS at a certain discount along with 2 EA games from a selected catalog (with progressive discounts when ordering more games from the list). I know I got the DOS version of PowerMonger ; I think the other was Night Shift, though that doesn’t seem to be an EA title.

  Anyway, 1992 saw many maddening delays of the GUS hardware. Finally, reports of GUS shipments began to trickle into the Prodigy message forums. Then one day in November, 1992, mine arrived. Into the 286 machine it went and a valiant attempt at software installation was made. A friend and I fought with the software late into the evening, trying to make this thing work reasonably. I remember grabbing a pair of old headphones sitting near the computer that were used for an ancient (even for the time) portable radio. That was the only means of sound reproduction we had available at that moment. And it still sounded incredible.

  After graduating to progressively superior headphones, I would later return to that original pair only to feel my ears were being physically assaulted. Strange, they sounded fine that first night I was trying to make the GUS work. I guess this was my first understanding that the degree to which one is a snobby audiophile is all a matter of hard-earned experience.

  Technology
  The GUS was powered by something called a GF1 which was supposed to use a technology called wavetable synthesis. In the early days, I thought (and I wasn’t alone in this) that this meant that the GF1 chip had a bunch of digitized instrument samples stored in the ASIC. That wasn’t it.

  However, it did feature 32 digital channels at a time when most PC audio cards had 2 (plus that Yamaha FM synthesizer). There was some hemming and hawing about how the original GUS couldn’t drive all 32 channels at a full 44.1 kHz ("CD quality") playback rate. It’s true— if 14 channels were enabled, all could be played at 44.1 kHz. Enabling more channels started progressive degradation and with all 32 channels, each was only playing at around 19 kHz. Still, from my emerging game programmer perspective, that allowed for 8-channel tracker music and 6 channels of sound effects, all at the vaunted CD level of quality.

  Games and Compatibility
  The primary reason to have a discrete sound card was for entertainment applications — ahem, games. GUS support was pretty sketchy out of the gate (ostensibly a major reason for the card’s delay). While many sound cards offered Sound Blaster emulation by basically having the same hardware as Sound Blaster cards, the GUS took a software route towards emulating the SB. To do this required a program called the Sound Blaster Operating System, or SBOS.

  Oh, how awesome it was to hear the program exclaim "SBOS installed !" And how harshly it grated on your nerves after the 200th time hearing it due to so many reboots and fiddling with options to make your games work. Also, I’ve always wondered if there’s something special about sampling an ’s’ sound — does it strain the sampling frequency range ? Perhaps the phrase was sampled at too low a bitrate because the ’s’ sounds didn’t come through very clearly, which is something you notice after hundreds of iterations when there are 3 ’s’ sounds in the phrase.

  Fortunately, SBOS became less relevant with the advent of Mega-Em, a separate emulator which intercepted calls to Roland MIDI systems and routed them to the very capable GUS. Roland-supporting games sounded beautiful.

  Eventually, more and more DOS games were released with native Gravis support, sometimes with the help of The Miles Sound System (from our friends at Rad Game Tools — you know, the people behind Smacker and Bink). The library changelog is quite the trip down PC memory lane.

  An important area where the GUS shined brightly was that of demos and music trackers. The emerging PC demo scene embraced the powerful GUS (aided, no doubt, by Gravis’ sponsorship of the community) and the coolest computer art and music of the time natively supported the card.

  Programming
  At this point in my life, I was a budding programmer in high school and was fairly intent on programming video games. So far, I had figured out how to make a few blips using a borrowed Sound Blaster card. I went to great lengths to learn how to program the Gravis Ultrasound.

  Oh you kids today, with your easy access to information at the tips of your fingers thanks to Google and the broader internet. I had to track down whatever information I could find through a combination of Prodigy message boards and local dialup BBSes and FidoNet message bases. Gravis was initially tight-lipped about programming information for its powerful card, as was de rigueur of hardware companies (something that largely persists to this day). But Gravis eventually saw an opportunity to one-up encumbent Creative Labs and released a full SDK for the Ultrasound. I wanted the SDK badly.

  So it was early-mid 1993. Gravis released an SDK. I heard that it was available on their support BBS. Their BBS with a long distance phone number. If memory serves, the SDK was only in the neighborhood of 1.5 Mbytes. That takes a long time to transfer via a 2400 baud modem at a time when long distance phone charges were still a thing and not insubstantial.

  Luckily, they also put the SDK on something called an ’FTP site’. Fortunately, about this time, I had the opportunity to get some internet access via the local university.

  Indeed, my entire motivation for initially wanting to get on the internet was to obtain special programming information. Is that nerdy enough for you ?

  I see that the GUS SDK is still available via the Gravis FTP site. The file GUSDK222.ZIP is dated 1998 and is less than a megabyte.

  Next Generation : CD Support
  So I had my original GUS by the end of 1992. That was just the first iteration of the Gravis Ultrasound. The next generation was the GUS MAX. When I was ready to get into the CD-ROM era, this was what I wanted in my computer. This is because the GUS MAX had CD-ROM support. This is odd to think about now when all optical drives have SATA interfaces and (P)ATA interfaces before that— what did CD-ROM compatibility mean back then ? I wasn’t quite sure. But in early 1995, I headed over to Computer City (R.I.P.) and bought a new GUS MAX and Sony double-speed CD-ROM drive to install in the family’s PC.

  
  
  

  About the "CD-ROM compatibility" : It seems that there were numerous competing interfaces in the early days of CD-ROM technology. The GUS MAX simply integrated 3 different CD-ROM controllers onto the audio card. This was superfluous to me since the Sony drive came with an appropriate controller card anyway, though I didn’t figure out that the extra controller card was unnecessary until after I installed it. No matter ; computers of the day were rife with expansion ports.

  
  
  The 3 different CD-ROM controllers on the GUS MAX
  

  Explaining The Difference
  It was difficult to explain the difference in quality to those who didn’t really care. Sometime during 1995, I picked up a quasi-promotional CD-ROM called "The Gravis Ultrasound Experience" from Babbage’s computer store (remember when that was a thing ?). As most PC software had been distributed on floppy discs up until this point, this CD-ROM was an embarrassment of riches. Tons of game demos, scene demos, tracker music, and all the latest GUS drivers and support software.

  Further, the CD-ROM had a number of red book CD audio tracks that illustrated the difference between Sound Blaster cards and the GUS. I remember loaning this to a tech-savvy coworker who disbelieved how awesome the GUS was. The coworker took it home, listened to it, and wholly agreed that the GUS audio sounded better than the SB audio in the comparison — and was thoroughly confused because she was hearing this audio emanating from her Sound Blaster. It was the difference between real-time and pre-rendered audio, I suppose, but I failed to convey that message. I imagine the same issue comes up even today regarding real-time video rendering vs., e.g., a pre-rendered HD cinematic posted on YouTube.

  Regrettably, I can’t find that CD-ROM anymore which leads me to believe that the coworker never gave it back. Too bad, because it was quite the treasure trove.

  Aftermath
  According to folklore I’ve heard, Gravis couldn’t keep up as the world changed to Windows and failed to deliver decent drivers. Indeed, I remember trying to keep my GUS in service under Windows 95 well into 1998 but eventually relented and installed some kind of more appropriate sound card that was better supported under Windows.

  Of course, audio output capability has been standard issue for any PC for at least 10 years and many people aren’t even aware that discrete sound cards still exist. Real-time audio rendering has become less essential as full musical tracks can be composed and compressed into PCM format and delivered with the near limitless space afforded by optical storage.

  A few years ago, it was easy to pick up old GUS cards on eBay for cheap. As of this writing, there are only a few and they’re pricy (but perhaps not selling). Maybe I was just viewing during the trough of no value a few years ago.

  Nowadays, of course, anyone interested in studying the old GUS or getting a nostalgia fix need only boot up the always-excellent DOSBox emulator which provides remarkable GUS emulation support.