Research: The Life and Death of Apps

June 7, 2011 -

MTV Networks released the results from its "Love 'Em or Leave 'Em: Adoption, Abandonment and the App-Addled Consumer" study, which examines the life cycle of apps, from how consumers find them, and why people keep them or delete them. Culled from responses to a survey of more than 1,300 mobile app users, MTVN uncovered some interesting statistics related to the global app market.

Around 91 percent said apps expose them to new things; 87 percent said apps let them have fun no matter where they are or what they're doing; 77 percent said apps serve as personal assistants; 75 percent claim that apps give them time to relax; 73 say that apps allow time to connect and interact with family and friends; and 70 percent said apps make the rest of life better.

When asked what they would rather give up instead of their favorite app, 69 percent of men said their favorite news source, while 68 percent said coffee. Around 68 percent of women said they would rather go a year without soda and 63 percent would give up their favorite reality show.

On how consumers discover apps, 53 percent said that personal recommendations were important in deciding which apps to download, while 52 percent relied on user reviews and 42 percent said seeing a friend use a particular app was a critical component. Additionally, 47 percent discovered apps via app stores from Apple and Android. For free apps, a higher number of positive ratings drives most consumers (50 percent) to download. The second most-important factor (43 percent) is personal recommendations. For paid apps, price (63 percent) is very important, followed by whether there is a free or lite preview version of the app (49 percent).

TV and movie apps can have a shelf life of just a few weeks (38 percent are deleted in the first three weeks after download), but two-thirds of them (66 percent) are checked at least once a day. When users find an entertainment app that they love two-thirds check their favorite TV or Movie app at least once a day, with nearly half (44 percent) checking it several times a day. And for each time it's open, 45 percent spend more than 10 minutes with their favorite TV or Movie app. For gaming apps, the grace period is a little longer. Fewer than 20 percent of gaming apps are deleted in the first three weeks of ownership. Nearly half (49 percent) of gaming app users check their apps at least several times a day.

While the early stages of the app life cycle are often based on recommendations, the final stages are more personal - claims MTVN. Only 37 percent of entertainment apps and 39 of gaming apps continue to be used because friends use the same apps. For TV and movie apps, ease of use (79 percent) and new content (55 percent) are the biggest reasons consumers will use an app for the long term. Better alternatives (55 percent) and lack of new content (42 percent) will drive a consumer to delete an app.

Gamers look for apps that are challenging (75 percent) and easy to use (73 percent). With gaming apps, more than three-fourths (77 percent) of consumers say they'll delete an app simply after they lose interest. Three-fourths (75 percent) of consumers said it's very important that an app is "entertaining or fun to use," while 62 percent said it's very important that an app "feels good" in terms of its touch screen feel. Finally, half of participants said it's very important that an app "constantly has new things for me to see, read or do." More than eight in 10 (83 percent) said they are "often surprised at how useful an app can become even if I don't initially think this is something I need."

Posted in

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MaskedPixelanteNumber 3: Night Dive was brought to the attention of the public by a massive game recovery, and yet most of their released catalogue consists of games that other people did the hard work of getting re-released.04/17/2014 - 8:46pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 2: If Humongous Entertainment wanted their stuff on Steam, why didn't they talk to their parent company, which does have a number of games published on Steam?04/17/2014 - 8:45pm
MaskedPixelanteNumber 1: When Night Dive spent the better part of a year teasing the return of true classics, having their big content dump be edutainment is kind of a kick in the stomach.04/17/2014 - 8:44pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician