conde nast.jpegWe’re finally starting to get some data about iPad usage. Moco News interviewed Condé Nast about their survey of readers of the GQ, Vanity Fair, Wired and Glamour apps.

Here are some of the findings:

users are not the early-adopters the publisher expected

readers were familiar with the kind of navigation the iPad requires and interactive ads needed instructions

readers seem to have spent more time with the apps than the print versions

readers tended to leave the iPad at home and the device probably shouldn’t be considered a mobile device.

More fascinating info in the article. The survey consisted of 100 hours of one-on-one interviews and 5,000 in-app surveys.

Looks as if some of the received wisdom of the tech pundits is being challenged.


  1. The magazines’ lack of popularity might be explained by their price. At $4 to $5 per issue, people are reluctant to buy. No annual subscription offered. On the other hand, via Zinio, I subscribe to National Geographic for $15 for 12 issues which I consider a wonderful value. I is gorgeous! I’m sure some of the others are, too but at $48-$60 per year, forget about it.

  2. i’ll second what Mary said, too. i know there are other costs to consider in making a delicious ipad version, but if the cost per-issue is more than i’d pay for a regular cellulose subscription, then i won’t buy it. (within reason, like with the Nat Geo example).

    personally, i’m also waiting for my paper magazines to make digital version so i can switch over seamlessly. some are totally dragging their feet.

  3. If indeed these publishers are not offering a discounted subscription to the nifty-techie version, then they are running the entire race and stopping just short of the finish line.

    We really need a year’s worth of data before drawing conclusions about usage. ‘Fads’ tend to peter out completely after a year.

The TeleRead community values your civil and thoughtful comments. We use a cache, so expect a delay. Problems? E-mail