[saurik]

> At Front for example, people using the desktop app spend on average 34% more time on the app that those using the web version.

...maybe I'm crazy, but the primary metric I would evaluate a tool designed to increase business productivity is not how much time I spend using it, and in fact would normally be summarized as the exact opposite of this metric...

[gberger]

Also, correlation/causation.

It could be that the people who download the desktop app are already the heavy users.

[prof_hobart]

In this case, I'm not sure that's an important distinction.

Whether it's the desktop app driving increased usage or it's heavy users preferring the desktop app, it suggests that one way or another, the desktop app is better for heavy usage.

[rtpg]

You're making the assumption that the people accomplish the same time in the desktop version and the web version.

Given that the desktop version and the web versions are the same, the assumption is that both are at least similarly productive. Therefore the desktop version is actually helping people accomplish more (or it's more useful for high-usage people? Or it's just correlation)

[BinaryIdiot]

I don't know that the exact opposite metric would be useful but I agree their metric doesn't sound useful either.

[saurik]

I think the normal summary would be "the new version of our tool has streamlined numerous features, allowing you to spend less time using our app; testing already reports people spend 30% less time"; the implication, though, left out of the summary, is "and accomplish the same things" (which is why it is only summarized as the exact opposite, but the metric, I agree, is not the exact opposite).

[netheril96]

For entertainment apps such as social networking, games and music, there are no specific goals to achieve, and more time spent the better. I don't know whether that applies to the app in this article, though.

[saurik]

Hence why I qualified my statement to "a tool designed...", as that is what the article is discussing (the wording of your comment makes me wonder if you read it at all ;P). FEIW, I also question whether "engagement" is good metric for social tools as well: you up engagement by making things critically need harder to use, which is a perverse incentive.