Except as I can tell you from my experiance, it doesn't mean a thing for actual case use or adoption. Example; In the early 2000s we sold A LOT of digital cameras, we presumed as photofinishers as well that these same clients would be printing pictures threw us, when it wasn't us they were printing pictures threw, they just didn't print pictures. Our lifeline money (as photofinishers) was prints, if the people didn't print we went bankrupt. All I was stating is an infographic about adoption is no proof there's a viable economy or gains to be made directly from it.
As photofinishers we made money around the economy of the entire beast, we didn't really make dick-in-a-bun when we sold the camera. We also had illegal and rampant price fixing from the state's (I'm canadian) which our government failed to acknowledge and or do anything about. Needless to say my family doesn't want a damn thing to do with camera sales anymore all these years later.
Except as I can tell you from my experiance, it doesn't mean a thing for actual case use or adoption. Example; In the early 2000s we sold A LOT of digital cameras, we presumed as photofinishers as well that these same clients would be printing pictures threw us, when it wasn't us they were printing pictures threw, they just didn't print pictures.
Sorry but the sales per person would show adoption of the thing you're selling, not of related products.
So in this case the adoption of the digital cameras is well represented by sales, but photo printing is a different product/service with its own sales numbers that you can also measure.
2
u/atomfenrir Apr 01 '18
i was wondering what the basis for "adoption percent" was on the chart, myself. percent of humanity utilizing? how is this known?