@andrewchen

New here? Check out my list of featured essays · Blogging roadmap · Ask me anything

How desktop apps beat websites at building large active userbases

Why does everyone hate on desktop applications? Homer and spiderpig love them.

Desktop apps have better retention, while websites have better user signup rates – which factor wins?
There’s a lot of conventional wisdom that it’s dumb to build a desktop app, and it’s marketing suicide to do so.

This argument usually has two parts:

  • Poor conversion rates: Maybe 1-2 out of every 100 – will download your application
  • Poor virality: Since desktop apps are often standalone utilities, they lack the social element that makes them viral

You can compare this to web products which often have 10%+ registration rates, up to 50% when they are through friend-to-friend invitations.

It seems obvious that going down the web route is a slam dunk, but in fact it’s not – desktop applications often have a better long-term retention, and this can easily offset the lower download+install rates. The way to look at this is that the number of active registered users is a function of signup rate AND retention, and you can balance one with the other. (And of course, ideally you have both). To me, this discussion opens the way for more innovation in browser extensions, downloadable apps, and other low signup % products as long as the long-term value is great enough.

Note that this blog post will focus exclusively on the signup rate versus retention rate, and leave the virality discussion for another day. Let’s dig into this further.

Comparing applications versus websites
Here’s an example of the simple differences between the two channels:

Total users Signup % Registrations
Application 100,000 1% 1,000
Website 100,000 10% 10,000

Starting with the same number of new unique users, it’s obvious that this can lead to a huge difference in account registrations.

However, because web products are so easy to get into, they are also easy to get out of – it’s hard to be sticky. The one true retention mechanic is using e-mail notifications to get the user back. Compare that to a desktop product that use techniques like:

  • Open itself whenever a file extension is clicked
  • Install itself on the system tray
  • Add itself to the desktop
  • Start up automatically when the OS loads
  • Run nicely in the background to pop up when appropriate
  • … and many other retention-happy features

(Of course, you should never use these techniques without contributing value to the user, lest you get uninstalled and reported to Symantec).

Similarly, there is also emerging a world of in-between web-triggered applications like Firefox extensions and Adobe AIR apps, which are easier to install but also take advantage of a wider set of retention hooks to stay relevant.

So when all of this has been taken into account, you can see how our 100,000 new users fare after a couple time periods below. Here’s a table that describes two retention rates period-over-period, and how many active users are left after each period, starting with the initial numbers (1k vs 10k) discussed previously:

Retention 0 1 2 3 4 5
Application 80% 1,000 800 640 512 410 328
Website 50% 10,000 5,000 2,500 1,250 625 313

As you can see, after the course of 5 months, the application now has more active users than the website, even though it started with a 1/10th the registered users.

Note that retention rates usually improve period-over-period, and are not constant as shown above – I’m just using a constant retention rate so that we can simply the math in the next section!

Looking at the math
For the readers that fall asleep when an equation is shown, please skip this section :-)

Ultimately, the function for describing the number of active users at any period is:

# of active users at time t = initial user signups * (retention rate)^t
= (new users * signup %) * (retention rate) ^ t

So if you have 100,000 new users, a 10% signup rate and 50% retention rate, then your equation looks like:

# of website actives at time t = 100,000 * 10% * (0.50)^t

If you want to calculate when a website’s active users falls below a desktop app’s active users, you can set the two equal to each other and solve for t:

100,000 * 10% * (0.50)^t = 100,000 * 1% * (0.80)^t
10% * 0.5^t = 1% * 0.8^t
10% / 0.1% = 0.8^t / 0.5^t
log 10 = log(0.8^t/0.5^t)
1 = log(0.8^t) – log(0.5^t)
1 = t * log(0.8) – t * log(0.5)
1 = t * (log(0.8)-log(0.5))
1 = t * log(0.8/0.5)
t = 1 / log(0.8/0.5) = 4.9

Thus, after 4.9 periods you’d see the higher retention product start beating the high signup product. In the cases where they never intersect, you’d get a negative number there. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to solve this in the general case where you know that a website’s signup rate is X times more than desktop app, and Y times in retention.

Conclusions
Ultimately, I believe my calculations show that desktop apps have natural advantages (and disadvantages), but are not strictly worse than building a web property. You still need a long-term value proposition that drives great natural retention. You need expertly-done “hooks” into the OS, email, and other notification systems that encourage repeat usage. And finally, you need social hooks into viral channels (whether web or beyond) that encourage virality and user-to-user interaction

I think it’s not a surprise that there have been great success stories in desktop apps in recent years, such as Skype, Twitter clients, new browsers, and other tools that follow the design patterns of the above. And of course, nothing beats building a killer product that spreads naturally through word-of-mouth – that said, you can stack the deck using great retention and virality :-)

Want more?
If you liked this post, please subscribe or follow me on Twitter. You can also find more essays here.

Like this post?
If you liked this post, please subscribe or follow me on Twitter. You can also find more essays here.

Written by Andrew Chen
August 24th, 2009 at 8:30 am
  • http://twitter.com/JuliaMak Julia Mak

    Great post Andrew! A well built product + desktop app would provide the easiest and most natural way for users to utilize the product and generate high retention. Thanks for doing the calculations and some well-put insights that a lot of people have yet to realize!

  • davidlocke

    In Moore's technology adoption lifecycle, the installed app and the web app begin their life in entirely different places. The installed app will eventually become a web app. The web app leaves a lot of money on the table by skipping the early phases of life where the installed app creates wealth. Once the installed app enters its late market, its wealth creation days have ended. The web app never did that.

    In the cash capture stage, both apps become similar and have similar economics. Cost management is king, promo spend matters, it looks like a constant recession, downward pricing pressures are persistent and worsening.

    The installed app and web app operate as completely different businesses. For the installed app most of the money is made by upgrading installed customers. It's far cheaper than churn in terms of sales commissions and cost of sale. So even if the numeric comparison showed higher revenues for the web app, profits would still be lower.

  • DavideDiCillo

    I think the secret to succeed nowadays is ubiquity.

    Look at successful apps like Evernote, that you can use in a browser, on your phone or locally on your machine.
    Same thing for Twitter. Big part of its success is because of the high number of clients available, that give the final user the power of choosing how to use their service.

    I personally like desktop apps better, cause way too often I close the wrong browser window and find that really annoying. In that case Fluid or Prism (on OS X) is the answer for me.

  • Gopi

    How about a portals/startpages? – they are technically websites but their retention is almost that of a desktop app!

  • http://www.brandthunder.com kdwinnell

    Andrew:

    This is a helpful and relevant post. My company plays in this space, and like any marketer we try to maximize the strengths and minimize the weaknesses – and some things are just beyond your control.

    The timing of a launch as well as type of audience can greatly affect the adoption of the application. It's pretty easy to predict that a sports team's adoption is going to ebb and flow whether it's the sport's season or off season. Likewise, retention could be considered migratory with users returning each year at the first signs of pre-season. While this might affect when you want to do the math, it won't separate the app from the web site.

    The audience type, however, can play a very serious role. We've seen adoption rates of 30%, and sometimes from surprising clients. For client's that fit those profiles, the app can go toe to toe with any program.

    The biggest surprise for me, however, is not around any of the data points discussed — it's how often companies view the options as mutually exclusive. “We can't do this, because we're doing that…” There are enough options and enough vendors that costs and resource demands are pretty low. Once built, there's little overhead to hosting the various products. So, I'd expect to see more racking and stacking of the programs and execute them as quickly as possible letting the consumer decide where and how they'd like to be engaged.

  • http://blog.zadeh.us/ Shayan Zadeh

    love the post! one thing to keep in mind is that you really don't have to always pick between the two options you discuss. there are many examples of when one really complements the other. For example, at Zoosk we really felt that we could extend our users' experience and their connection to the platform though a desktop application. That's why we released Zoosk Desktop a few weeks back.

    so far the traction has been amazing. our most active users are now basically on Zoosk around the clock and the feedback has been so positive that we are focusing even more than planned resources at our desktop AIR client.

    Who said You Can't Have Your Cake And Eat It Too! Adoption of web (even of social apps!) augmented with engagement of Desktop. Pure delicious :-)

    PS: your connect integration is broken :) this is what i get when i try it http://skitch.com/shayang/bh12m/facebook-develo…

  • http://www.facebook.com/andrewhchen Andrew Chen

    Thanks for the heads up on the Facebook connect, just fixed it!

    I'll have to check out Zoosk desktop, congrats on it's success :-)

  • http://www.easysitebuild.com/ website builder

    Great article! I was impressed by the author he managed to compute the computation in the article.

Recent posts

Want more? Featured essays and book recommendations