If someone today listens carefully for the discourse around the generative AI, it will be easy to conclude that everyone is struggling for more AI abilities and cannot wait to use them in their daily life. But AI assistants have shown a clear disconnect in a recent ZDNET/Aberdeen survey of how much sellers are carrying AI assistants and how much users really want these abilities – at least for now.
In fact, a survey of March 2025 found that 71% of Americans will not make additional payments for AI auxiliary features in products that they use. And while this number varies on the basis of age group (grows up to 81% for those 55+ and falls up to 56% for those 18-34), AI has little enthusiasm in the board for supportive facilities, only 16% General Demographic said that they would make additional payments for AI.
Survey major takeaways
-
All we all adults say that in one way or the other they will not use most AI features. Only “to answer questions to use AI” had a slight majority, with 52% saying that they often or sometimes use it. In addition, answering questions was the only AI feature that broke the single digit for frequent use, 13% said they would use it frequently.
-
The lowest desired use of AI feature was “an AI to manage the functions”, with 64% that they would not use it, shut down the capacity if possible, or stop using a product with this feature.
-
Asked if they will stop using a product, if they cannot stop or remove AI supportive features, 31% said they will stop using that product (including 28% of genes), with additional 38% that they can say that they can say. With these results, one can also see that for a significant section of users, the AI accessory can actually be a negative when it comes to achieving or maintaining customers.
-
On the other hand, most AI applications were tested the majority value, with the most valuable “using AI accessory for photo editing” (with 58% feeling it will be very or somewhat valuable) and at least valuable “AI assistant for virtual meeting tools” (with 52% search price).
These conclusions are contrary in such a way that many top sellers are contacting AI and AI assistants. In most cases, the sellers are taking a full-store-forward strategy to embed AI assistants in all their main products, from smartphones to productivity devices to meeting and communication apps.
Also: Best AI for coding in 2025 (including two new top pics – what not to use)
These aggressive AI strategies along with -are equally ambitious plans to increase costs or to create a feature to AI, for which users will make additional payments. Given the efforts and amounts of resources putting vendors in AI and AI assistants, they clearly expect users to embrace AI completely in all parts of their work and personal life.
However, recently the ZDNET/Aberdeen survey suggests that there is very little evidence that this strategy will pay, only 8% of adults said that they will pay additional for AI capabilities in their products and services. And by recent surveys Senate And Aberdeen AI shows a uniform lack of enthusiasm for the feature set, some suggested that AI has already entered the “disillusionment trough”. Gartner Hype Cycle,
In fact, when we asked adults if they would stop using a product, if they cannot stop or remove AI auxiliary features, 31% said they will stop using that product (including 28% gene Z), saying with an additional 38% that they can say. With these results, one can also see that for a significant section of users, the AI accessory can actually be a negative when it comes to achieving or maintaining customers.
Ai is a cross-general feature indifferent among AI assistants
To understand whether apathy in AI capabilities was widespread or focused on specific AI characteristics, we asked adults questions how many times they would use general AI capabilities, from writing, from writing to image editing to helping questions from supporting questions to help in daily tasks. Most adults said that they would never use AI in most cases tested.
More than that, given how the AI centers are the most publicized around how it would become central for your daily life, those users said that they would often use AI, all were in single digits in all, but a use case (to answer questions using AI, which was at 13%). This means that even those who use AI will mostly use it only sometimes, which hardly fit the story of AI, mainly things will be found.
Of course, some people will answer that the results are diagonally by older generations that are uncomfortable with AI. But when we look at Jean Z (18 -28), they are rarely enthusiastic.
In most cases between General Z, AI features are frequent use in mid-cousins, only “breaks one of the five thresholds (23%) to answer questions” to use AI. And General Z adults who say that they will never use specific AI features, live around half, meaning that relying on General Z to lack enthusiasm among older generations cannot be a victory strategy.
But what about AI assistants designed to help users with common functions and scheduling? For example, using AI assistant for arrangements for traveling, buying goods or dinner reservation. Participate to any seller’s declaration about new AI abilities and these examples are usually the front and center.
Also: I tested 10 AI detectors – and these 5 recognized the AI text correctly every time.
However, our research suggests that it is one of the least popular of all AI abilities. We found that 64% of adults said that they would never use AI assistant to manage and schedule work and schedule (with 6% of the people they will stop using a product with this capacity) 49% General Z and 56% millennium will never use AI for this. Right now, this seems to be a clear case of AI vendors that tell users what they want rather than looking for areas where users can actually give importance to AI.
Seeing possible values in AI assistants
While the results of this survey are hardly good news for any company that is currently on the use of AI assistant, adult AI and AI assistants are not fully down. When we asked if they saw the potential value in AI device integration, the results were definitely more positive for AI supporters.
In cases of all AI use tested, most adults found AI capabilities very or somewhat valuable, and in Jean Z adults, more than 10 to 10 values were found in all areas tested. Interestingly, AI assistants integrate in photo editing tools, a capacity that was the lowest when asked if they would use it, there was an area where users saw the most possible value, 58% found it very or somewhat valuable.
This is the relationship in insight that among the final users, the frequency of use is not necessarily associated with the value. We see an adult an AI that sometimes helps to improve photos and media, for example, an AI assistant designed to run all your daily tasks.
Also: AI agents are not just an assistant: how are they changing the future of work today
While just a year ago it could seem that generative AI and AI assistants would be immediate successes and will avoid classic propaganda cycles, we see that it is not so. As the promotional cycle for generative AI and AI assistants starts tenden at the bottom, we see a specific situation where the abilities of a technology are overpromized, the potential decline (such as hallucinations and inaccuracy) is ignored, and the users who really want are not taken care of.
But there is a promise on the horizon. If the business can sufficiently slow down to focus on that AI provides real aid and can avoid indiscriminately pursuing unwanted and prepared capabilities on users, then AI and AI have good ability to avoid the lower part of the propaganda cycle and become a regular piece of personal life for AI and AI assistants.
Working: All figures, until otherwise said, are from yougov Plc. The total sample size was 2,354 adults. The fieldwork was done between 6–10 March 2025. The survey was conducted online. The figures have become weighted and all American adults (18+ age groups) are representatives.
