The customarily competent media-survey firm, The Nielsen Company, has backtracked on its startling claim that one-third of all iPad users have never download an app. The company now says that the number of download virgins is fewer than one in ten. "This article and the related download have been amended to reflect updates to …
There were lots of maxi pad users who were confused to what the term App meant in relation to their sanitary product
That is quite a fsck up
That is quite a fsck up.
There's a Louis CK bit about this.
It's okay, James, you can swear, we're all (mostly) adults here.
What happened to "Downloaded Only Free Apps"?
That number, too, could be embarrassing to someone trying to convince developers they can get rich selling stuff on their store...
If we assume that that number was correct, and that the original "Downloaded a paid app" number was correct, then we have the following breakout:
63% - downloaded a paid app
28% - downloaded only free apps
9% - didn't download anything
My guess is that they were convinced that updates delivered through the app store should count towards the download numbers.
This analysis is bolstered by the fact that the figures on the right (categories of paid apps) didn't change at all between revisions. If they had somehow miscounted paid-for apps, one would expect the breakdown by category to change at least slightly.
Free apps are far from profit free
Most free apps exist either to entice the buyer into a pro version or sequel released for a price, contain revenue generating ads, or simply gain the developer attention and rating making future releases easier to market.
Just because a user has never downloaded a single paid app has no bearing on how "profitable" that user is or is not. Many of the most popular aps are now free because the ad revenue from heavy continued of a larger user base use is simply more profitable than 70% of $1-2.
Nielsen is all thumbs
Maybe the poor sod putting the presentation together was using Keynote on a company iPad... Amazing what can result from careless multitouches.
Nielsen are $#!+heads
I never do take these survey results seriously. After watching that episode of Mathnet where it turned out that one of these "survey" companies are fabricating results.
After all, it's the Nielsen TV channel surveys for Malaysia that made me satellite provider drop BBC Entertainment and thus costing me my source of Doctor Who and Red Dwarf.
Geek. Because I actually enjoyed watching Square One TV (and thus Mathnet)
Possibly a simple answer...
The first chart shows what was purchased from the ipad, the second shows what was download to the pad from an existing account including new and old (pre ipad) purchases.
Basically if you have paid for an app on your phone you dont need to buy it again for the pad.
Cupertino would like to point out that saying 35% have not downloaded is incorrect as although they have not purchased new they have downloaded existing purchased apps.
The iPad and iPhone are interchangable in respect of devices on an account and will hence forth be known by the common moniker of iPhads.
points 4 u
that is also a good point, especially where there are more than 1 iDevice per household.
My wife has never downloaded an app on her own, but she has near a hundred on her device.
Maybe someone included the "Travel Planning" percentage in the "No Downloads" sum in their spreadsheet?
Could both be true
Assuming 23% of the user have jailbroken their devices and then downloaded apps elsewhere.
Neilsen's customers are marketing execs
The results that weren't what they were paid to deliver, they got "corrected", end of story.
Really, you believe any results from an outfit whose bottom line depends on telling MARKETEERS what they want to hear?
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- 166 days later: Space Station astronauts return to Earth
- What did you see, Elder Galaxies? What made you age so quickly?