Wednesday, May 19, 2010

In early iPad app reviews, lots of discontent

One of Gannett Blog's most in-the-know readers, My Boss, says Gannett's paid content strategy is in "disarray," as iPad downloads for the free USA Today app are declining. My Boss wrote last night: "It appears that everyone is now worried that a subscription version for the iPad will not work."

USAT's app is available for free until July 4, after which Gannett plans to charge a yet-to-be-announced subscription fee.

The newspaper's direct rivals have plenty to worry about, too, based on current reviews of the major newspaper iPad apps on Apple's site. Following are current customer ratings for USA Today, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. As you can see, USAT fared better than the other two in average "stars" awarded:

NYT: average rating of 2.5 stars
The breakdown in reader votes:
  • Five stars: 348 votes
  • Four: 265
  • Three: 374
  • Two: 452
  • One: 820
WSJ: average 1.5 stars
  • Five: 622 votes
  • Four: 312
  • Three: 632
  • Two: 1,136
  • One: 6,005
USAT: average 3 stars
  • Five stars: 1,042 votes
  • Four: 569
  • Three: 581
  • Two: 510
  • One: 1,094
Do you own an iPad? How do you like it? Please post your replies in the comments section, below. To e-mail confidentially, write jimhopkins[at]gmail[dot-com]; see Tipsters Anonymous Policy in the rail, upper right.

36 comments:

  1. Oh come on. It's far too early to make any sort of judgement over whether the i-pad app will take off. The technology needs to be universally adopted - we are talking years not days ffs!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Agreed. Imagine if we had run out and built iPhone apps one month after the launch.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Years!. It took facebook less than a year to have more visitors to their site than it has taken Gannett's 100 newspapers and 23 broadcast stations and USA Today over the past 10 years!!!

    USA Today iPad app will not be paid for when someone on a 3G iPad will be able to hop over to the safari browser and just read the news for free.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Once again I see a disconnect between what Jim posts and the headline he writes.

    Where is the "discontent'' with USA TODAY's iPad app in early reviews, as stated in the headline?? In fact, he has posted the opposite, that USA TODAY's reviews are better than those of its competitors.

    Sure, someone posted that strategy is in disarray, and there are negative reviews in some places out there. But they are not mentioned in this item!

    Is Jim incapable of crediting USA TODAY with doing something right when the data he shows demonstrates just that?

    Really undercuts the entire blog when time after time Jim bends over backwards to say the negative even in the (admittedly), rare cases when there is something positive.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As I noted, USAT earned a higher average rating than the NYT and the WSJ. Nonetheless, USAT's app got 1,094 low, single-star ratings. That represents lots of unhappy customers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  8. So there's eleven hundred single star votes. How many tens of thousands of USA downloads do you think there have been since the app launched? Why does Apple feature USAT on its website? Come on Jim....give credit where credit is due. Your lack of credibility is showing

    ReplyDelete
  9. Like most journalists, I'm paid to be skeptical. Readers come to me for the news and opinions that Corporate doesn't provide.

    As to your question: I don't know how many USAT iPad apps have been downloaded. We've been told the number is declining.

    Do you have these figures, 6:44?

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hmmm, Robin Pence's staff to the rescue???? LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm not sure there is discontent with apps as much as there is discontent with the iPad itself. You trade a lot away to use an iPad and what you get in return just doesn't seem to be worth it. It's just no big thing in a world already overcrowded with gadgets vying for our all-too-limited attention.

    Also you don't seem crazy to me. Just on a hunt for the truth that can lead down blind alleys and dead ends.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You don't want to know what Jim does in blind alleys.

    ReplyDelete
  16. What kindergarten did you escape from? Where's your mama?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Jim has uncovered yet another example of corporate ineptness. You would think with something as important as the IPad ap, corporate would make sure they got it right. They didn't, and who is to blame? Jim for uncovering the evidence, or the execs at digital, or corporate?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I use it. It is okay with text, but way too slow with graphics and pix.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "USAT: average 3 stars"

    Doesn't look like they got it wrong to me.

    You and Jim should read a little more closely.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 3 stars aint bad. it ain't good, either.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Use it. Compare to the NYT. You will see the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  22. All these apps will get better as new versions are released. I only wish they were already getting unequivocally rave reviews.

    A note of caution, however: An iPad owner told me this week that he doesn't need apps, since he can browse his way to, for example, USAT's homepage, where he can read it for free. So, a subscription-based app must offer something more than what's already available for free on the Web.

    ReplyDelete
  23. MacWorld.com gives the USATODAY iPad app a 2 1/2 mouse out of 5 rating. Average.
    Why would anyone pay for news on an iPad when they won't pay online using a laptop? It makes no sense. This will only further accelerate the rate of decline for newsprint. Tough Business to be in.

    ReplyDelete
  24. On a technical note, Steve Jobs/Apple won't allow the Flash plug-in for the iPad and iPhone. I counted 2 advertisers and a video that required Flash on the USAT 'browser' front page. Jobs says using Flash will seriously drain the battery live of its portable devices, USAT app or not.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "So, a subscription-based app must offer something more than what's already available for free on the Web."

    Jim is going to get rich with this sort of helpful business advice. Next: He tells automakers they need to make better cars.

    He'll corner the market of really obvious advice dispensed by lunatics fired from Gannett.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "3 stars aint bad. it ain't good, either."

    His headline says lots of discontent.

    Both of you need to learn to read.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Jim, for your homepage I get the Living Social top banner ad on the iPhone (jpeg) and multiple sponsors that are flash-animated in Firefox.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "His headline says lots of discontent.
    Both of you need to learn to read."

    That would make sense IF I had written my post in reference to the headline. Here's a clue: I wasn't.

    Stay average, you corporate shill.

    ReplyDelete
  29. At least get your facts right before you complain about someone else distorting them. As I recall, Jim didn't get fired. He took a buyout.

    ReplyDelete
  30. First, the app store ratings are a joke. You don't even need to install an app to rate it. Second, far more haters rate an app than the ones that like it. Third, it is a new product. Initial downloads will always be high and decline. Kind of like sales of the iPad - or do you call that a failure too? In this situation, it is better to be early to the game with a 3 star app than late to the game with a 5 star. Fourth, you can integrate more tightly with the iPad than you can with a website - just don't expect that integration on day 1. Fifth, some people prefer apps. Sixth, The ROI on iPad/iPod app development is ridiculously high. Seventh, the advertising opportunities on Apple's products have barely scratched the surface. This is one case where hopefully the execs need for instant gratification won't doom a product.

    ReplyDelete
  31. 1. - I'm an actual iPad owner, unlike half to douche-bag posters here who don't know what they're talking about yet seem to have an opinion. Very douche-y.
    2. - While not scientific or perhaps even reliable, the Apple store postings are a single insight into user satisfaction. But one that should have prompted an actual review.
    3. - A far more reliable (and far more useful) analysis of the USAT iPad app would come from Jim eliciting, or perhaps conducting user reviews from persons who have ACTUALLY used all the apps mentioned. A story based on actual user interaction would have given all of us a much better feeling for whether the USAT app is good, bad or average.
    4. - IMHO the USAT iPad app is unremarkable and does not use the platform to the fullest. I wouldn't pay for it. Nor would I subscribe to it "through" the app if it were offered. You want cool? Check out the Bloomberg or NPR apps. Even the Time app (which requires the purchase of editions) attempts to be more than a backlit print edition. How lame is it that the USAT app has the motif of a scalloped newsprint edge running across the top of the screen?
    5. -

    ReplyDelete
  32. 11:55 am: I read in some of the Apple site reviews that the USAT app doesn't include the technology section (which, of course, would be ironic). Is that still true in the newer editions?

    ReplyDelete
  33. "A far more reliable (and far more useful) analysis of the USAT iPad app would come from Jim eliciting, or perhaps conducting user reviews from persons who have ACTUALLY used all the apps mentioned."

    Are you serious? Jim doesn't do that. He just criticizes, and then follows with dumb questions that prove he has done no research. Or he will say something dumb like: "Do you have those details?"

    He's a crazy person who was fired from Gannett. He might offer another version, but all the evidence points toward a dismissal.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Man, the corporate types are really pounding away at Jim here these days! The times, they must be desperate.

    ReplyDelete
  35. The following comment was posted by Anonymous@7:29 a.m. I deleted it by accident; here it is in full:

    @4:33, Do you really think that your repetitive jabs at abuse are going to have a chilling effect on a free exchange of ideas this time around? You come across as a lame and desperate-for-attention individual who can't contribute anything but a useless, droning noise. After I post this, I'm joining other readers here in ignoring you. Now go away.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Actually, when Jim has to fish for deleted comments to repost them, it shows how desperate he -- and you -- are.

    Jim is a lunatic who was fired from Gannett. This thread shows he writes of things he knows nothing about. Does he own an iPad? No. Has he ever used one? No.

    Is he crazy? Yes. Was he dismissed from Gannett? Yes.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.