PDA

View Full Version : MacRumors' Webcast Stats during the MWSF 2007 Keynote




MacRumors
Jan 14, 2007, 11:28 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

On January 9th, 2007, MacRumors delivered live updates of the Macworld San Francisco 2007 keynote speech given by Steve Jobs. Since no live Quicktime stream was made available, Apple fans had to rely on live web updates to follow the action. This year, we successfully incorporated near real-time photos into our keynote transcription.

After analyzing our logs files (22.4GB), we've posted a detailed summary (http://www.macrumors.com/events/mwsf2007-stats.html) of the MacRumorsLive system and the traffic it was able to serve.

In short, we peaked at over 213,000 simultaneous web visitors during the keynote and delivered over 408GB of data during the time surrounding the keynote event. If not for the efficiency of the MacRumorsLive webcast system, the same webcast would have generated almost 1 terabyte of data in the same short window of time.

In order to deliver near-real time photos, we had to temporarily expand our resources and incorporated Cachefly (http://www.cachefly.com/)'s content delivery system, Amazon's Simple Storage Service (http://www.amazon.com/aws), and Amazon's Elastic Compute Cloud Service (http://www.amazon.com/aws).

The final archive (http://www.macrumors.com/events/mwsf2007.html) of the keynote transcript remains available.

[ digg this ] (http://digg.com/apple/MacRumors_Posts_Detailed_Stats_From_Keynote_102_497_978_Hits)



javabear90
Jan 14, 2007, 11:31 PM
keep up the good work

BigPrince
Jan 14, 2007, 11:35 PM
Could you perhaps list the cost of a project like this? It might motivate people to donate to the site.

And yes, this is the next best thing from seeing it in person.

Aldyn
Jan 14, 2007, 11:38 PM
dang. but yes, keep up the good work!

dllavaneras
Jan 14, 2007, 11:41 PM
Excellent work! keep it up

Doctor Q
Jan 14, 2007, 11:44 PM
I'm surprised that the non-AJAX data transfer wouldn't come out to even more than a terabyte. AJAX, and the auto-refresh system used, made MacRumorsLive very bandwidth efficient.

aspro
Jan 14, 2007, 11:51 PM
Wow, those are some impressive numbers!

Keep up the great work so I can get up at an ungodly hour next year! :D

furthur
Jan 14, 2007, 11:53 PM
MacRumors was my one source for info from the MWSF Keynote and I found the coverage to be thrilling!!! I was on the edge of my seat awaiting each new update - which was always just a few seconds away.

Later, watcing the QT video of the event I felt as though I hadn't missed a thing. And the photos made me feel as though I was there!

Thanks so much for all your hard work in making an exciting day what it was.

nagromme
Jan 15, 2007, 12:02 AM
Thanks to MR, and to whoever was there typing away!

I made a point of clicking a few ads, just in case that supplies a few cents of support.

Doctor Q
Jan 15, 2007, 12:02 AM
Sometimes it seems almost silly that so many people want to hear the keynote news the split second it happens, and not wait 5 or 10 minutes while somebody prepares a nice written summary for them.

But the numbers speak for themselves; the play-by-play instant updates are hugely popular.

sethypoo
Jan 15, 2007, 12:12 AM
And Macrumors continues to impress. Thank you for the live web updates!

darwin022
Jan 15, 2007, 12:12 AM
IMO, the keynote reporting from Macrumors was much, much, much more up to date, faster, and better than last year.

The system worked very well. Congrats to you guys for very good and up to the minute keynote reporting!

Thanks!

MacNut
Jan 15, 2007, 12:17 AM
How close did we come to breaking the all time forum record.

mdntcallr
Jan 15, 2007, 12:37 AM
Great job Macrumors!!!

i know i was one of those streams and i am appreciative of the coverage.

thanks guys

savar
Jan 15, 2007, 01:06 AM
In order to deliver near-real time photos, we had to temporarily expand our resources and incorporated Cachefly (http://www.cachefly.com/)'s content delivery system, Amazon's Simple Storage Service (http://www.amazon.com/aws), and Amazon's Elastic Compute Cloud Service (http://www.amazon.com/aws).

How did Macrumors get into ECC? I thought there were like 10 spots in the world.

Awesome throughput though. When your *logs* are 22GB, you know you moved a lot of content.

twoodcc
Jan 15, 2007, 01:26 AM
keep up the good work

i agree. excellent job!

iMikeT
Jan 15, 2007, 01:47 AM
Congratulations MacRumors!

doogle
Jan 15, 2007, 01:51 AM
...um I found the live images to be a good addition but so small that they did not provide much detail. I jumped over to engadget to see their massive pictures - they seemed to have a better location in the hall too? They seemed to have heaps more text coming up on the site - maybe they have more resources/people? Whatever, I somehow trust MR more and congratulate you on another excellent event coverage.

arn
Jan 15, 2007, 02:12 AM
...um I found the live images to be a good addition but so small that they did not provide much detail. I jumped over to engadget to see their massive pictures - they seemed to have a better location in the hall too? They seemed to have heaps more text coming up on the site - maybe they have more resources/people? Whatever, I somehow trust MR more and congratulate you on another excellent event coverage.

A few issues... I think next time we will offer both.... fast/transcription text and longer summary paragraphs. We probably will try to increase photo size... but the original thought was that smaller/more photos would give more of a realtime feel to it.

They probably do have a better location in the hall... as Engadget gets media passes for the keynote, unlike MacRumors.

arn

Knox
Jan 15, 2007, 04:56 AM
I'm surprised that the non-AJAX data transfer wouldn't come out to even more than a terabyte. AJAX, and the auto-refresh system used, made MacRumorsLive very bandwidth efficient.

The 1TB figure assumes perfect caching of images & other static content, which of course wouldn't be the case in reality. It would probably have been much more but it's difficult to calculate exactly how much so I stayed on the safe side.

How did Macrumors get into ECC? I thought there were like 10 spots in the world.

Awesome throughput though. When your *logs* are 22GB, you know you moved a lot of content.

They emailed a "select group of developers" about it originally (whether that means 100 or 10,000 I have no idea) but I think you had to be pretty quick to get in - I signed up 20 minutes after I got the email.

The size of the logs amused me for a bit, until I came to having to process the things! I didn't dare try and use awstats to process the whole thing, instead I only used it to process the HTML/XML logs, but even then they were almost 7GB and awstats took about 9 hours to run.

eluk
Jan 15, 2007, 05:10 AM
A really impressive set of stats. The pictures add a lot to the overall service.
Great job.

fixyourthinking
Jan 15, 2007, 06:26 AM
Macrumors had (BY FAR) the quickest updates ... while Engadget was slightly more detailed ... it was about 5 to 10 minutes behind during most of the keynote and I really really liked Macrumors auto update feature. Good job Arn.



They probably do have a better location in the hall... as Engadget gets media passes for the keynote, unlike MacRumors.

arn

Did you apply for a media pass and get turned down? I would take issue with that with IDG ... I didn't see any Engadget staff on TV TWICE discussing MacWorld Expo and I certainly consider this site news/news reporting. I'll bet Bill Palmer got media passes ... for iProng ... if so that's a severe injustice (vs you NOT getting one).

niji
Jan 15, 2007, 07:05 AM
i had streams going from 3 sites. all considered themselves more or less live/quick refresh.
MacRumors site was BY FAR the best.
-accurate
-refreshed without fail with new info
those are the only important things.
other sites by comparison: sometimes didnt refresh, or refreshed with no new info and also had extraneous comments and sometimes wrong/mis-heard info.
WELL DONE!!

Sprung
Jan 15, 2007, 08:55 AM
Thank you.

Whistleway
Jan 15, 2007, 09:06 AM
Nice stuff.

Interesting to see a peak at 12p,, :) All those lunchers.

Rocketman
Jan 15, 2007, 10:05 AM
Macrumors had (BY FAR) the quickest updates ... while Engadget was slightly more detailed ... it was about 5 to 10 minutes behind during most of the keynote and I really really liked Macrumors auto update feature. Good job Arn.

Macrumors has several market advantages.

It scoops the news.

It makes no outrageous claims.

It summarizes and links to other sites.

It tracks the ACCURACY of site claims.

It really is the NYT of Apple rumors.

Rocketman

elskeptico
Jan 15, 2007, 11:04 AM
I was blown away with the coverage. The pictures and updates just kept coming :eek:

DrFrankTM
Jan 15, 2007, 11:13 AM
Could you perhaps list the cost of a project like this? It might motivate people to donate to the site.

And yes, this is the next best thing from seeing it in person.

I totally agree. I've been an avid reader of MacRumors for a few years now, but I have no clue about how much it costs to run the site and whether the site is making any money. If the ads on the site don't cover all the costs, I'd be happy to make a small donation and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one.

arn
Jan 15, 2007, 12:07 PM
Did you apply for a media pass and get turned down? I would take issue with that with IDG ... I didn't see any Engadget staff on TV TWICE discussing MacWorld Expo and I certainly consider this site news/news reporting. I'll bet Bill Palmer got media passes ... for iProng ... if so that's a severe injustice (vs you NOT getting one).

We were able to get a single unqualified media pass, which essentially means, no media keynote access, but access to other press events.

Not terrible, but not ideal either. I'll try to contact IDG now in the off-season to see what would qualify us. Obviously they can't let every "guy-with-blog" in, but certainly can't exclude on the basis of being a "blog" (since engadget, gizmodo etc... are blogs). I never really thought of MacRumors as a blog... since it was what is was before blogs became popular.

Perhaps more helpful would be Apple recognition, and media invitations to other events. not holding my breath on that one... :) but we'll see.

arn

BigPrince
Jan 15, 2007, 12:48 PM
We were able to get a single unqualified media pass, which essentially means, no media keynote access, but access to other press events.

Not terrible, but not ideal either. I'll try to contact IDG now in the off-season to see what would qualify us. Obviously they can't let every "guy-with-blog" in, but certainly can't exclude on the basis of being a "blog" (since engadget, gizmodo etc... are blogs). I never really thought of MacRumors as a blog... since it was what is was before blogs became popular.

Perhaps more helpful would be Apple recognition, and media invitations to other events. not holding my breath on that one... :) but we'll see.

arn

Any chance for you to list the cost of macrumors live and we could start a petition for you to get a "good" press pass. I don't know the exact number, but you really represent thousands of the Mac fans, many of them HUGE mac fans.

Macrumors has several market advantages.

It scoops the news.

It makes no outrageous claims.

It summarizes and links to other sites.

It tracks the ACCURACY of site claims.

It really is the NYT of Apple rumors.

Rocketman

amen.

arn
Jan 15, 2007, 12:55 PM
Any chance for you to list the cost of macrumors live and we could start a petition for you to get a "good" press pass. I don't know the exact number, but you really represent thousands of the Mac fans, many of them HUGE mac fans.

before people get on the petition bandwagon, let me just ask them nicely again and see where we get :)

as for the cost of the macrumorslive site...

Well, I'd wager we did it cheaper than everyone else with a comparable amount of traffic. We certainly couldn't have afforded it without the MacRumorsLive AJAX system Knox setup. I'll look into it.

BigPrince
Jan 15, 2007, 01:00 PM
We gotta come up with a better term then "Blog" for this website. Its really so much more and better then that. We should invent a new term for it. I am no where near as creative as some of the others on here so I won't even try to come up a cool term.

Next time your on the air you can tell them that your not a blog before you go on or tell them live we are not a blog. Until this lady used the term blog, I considered this a news site.

miniConvert
Jan 15, 2007, 01:04 PM
Very impressive numbers, well done for keeping everything so responsive - I was glued.

greg555
Jan 15, 2007, 01:47 PM
I appreciated the excellent (and problem-free) coverage.

Thanks!

Greg

Peace
Jan 15, 2007, 02:10 PM
Excellent stats and coverage arn.
Kudos to you!!

But.With the word "rumors" in the name of the website I see a very hard hill to climb in the world of Apple,Inc.

shoffmueller
Jan 15, 2007, 02:18 PM
I thought the actual updates were pretty bad. They were a collection of sentence fragments that were hard to follow. While I applaud your technology solution to near-live updates, youu might want to make sure your actual content is near-readable.

granex
Jan 15, 2007, 02:56 PM
A few issues... I think next time we will offer both.... fast/transcription text and longer summary paragraphs. We probably will try to increase photo size... but the original thought was that smaller/more photos would give more of a realtime feel to it.


I think that this is the best solution. I kept macrumors in one tab and engadget in another. The format and updating on macrumors was far superior, but the content on engadget was much richer. Probably need a team of people. One doing the fast updates, one taking the pictures and inserting them into the stream, and probably two others writing more extended notes on the presented content (they could trade off and leap frog one another so that they didn't fall too far behind).

I rather just stay with macrumors since that is where I live ;). Then you put in one or two banner ads at the top and start charging some superbowl rates (you have the numbers now to attract someone trying to make a big splash with special advertising).

Bosunsfate
Jan 15, 2007, 09:42 PM
I couldn't have asked for anything more aside from being there myself!.

Thanks for some really great coverage Arn.

doogle
Jan 15, 2007, 10:15 PM
I think that this is the best solution. I kept macrumors in one tab and engadget in another. The format and updating on macrumors was far superior, but the content on engadget was much richer. Probably need a team of people. One doing the fast updates, one taking the pictures and inserting them into the stream, and probably two others writing more extended notes on the presented content (they could trade off and leap frog one another so that they didn't fall too far behind).

I rather just stay with macrumors since that is where I live ;). Then you put in one or two banner ads at the top and start charging some superbowl rates (you have the numbers now to attract someone trying to make a big splash with special advertising).

...yes this is what I did (although AJAX had problems when I switched to reload Engadget).
You are exactly right - Engadget was richer but MR faster...somehow I feel like a teen when I am at Engadget :confused: