[WEB4LIB] Shockwave, Instant Messenger, and Other Browser Add-Ons

[Chris Poterala]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Donna Schumann wrote:
> 
> I need a reality check. I know that many libraries do install the latest
> plug-ins for IE or Netscape. Are our concerns about plug-ins using more
> bandwidth unfounded? I'm pretty confident that Real Audio and Real Video
> would eat up bandwidth, but I'm not at all sure about Shockwave. 
> 
> I'd appreciate any wisdom on this. Thanks!

Real Audio and Video are definitely bandwidth hogs; Shockwave is a
slightly different animal.

The Real protocols stream content to the client browser "all the
time", whenever someone's viewing audio or video, whereas Shockwave
content is normaly downloaded to the browser once during a session and
that's it as far as bandwidth hits.  Shockwave isn't a streaming
technology like, so while some Shockwave files (games for example) can be
large downloads, I wouldn't expect them to use up nearly as much bandwidth
as browsers running the Real clients.  

Cheers,
Chris

Chris Poterala, web developer/project manager
cpoteral at ford.com          -  Ford Motor Company
potsie at alumni.si.umich.edu -  Public Affairs New Media
Voice: (313) 594-0850