If you're so concerned about GDPR, probably hotjar is a good choice. It's free for personal use and it's all EU based.
An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
121–130 of 311 posts
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, unlike many smaller analytics providers, Google Analytics doesn't have glaring CSRF vulnerabilities and doesn't have creepy features that let you spy on individual users (no idea if this applies to Plausible or not).
> "[GA]...doesn't have creepy features that let you spy on individual users" google reserves that for itself so as not to lose it's dominance of online advertising and targeting. why would they share their bread and butter with the little guys?
No idea if that's true or not regarding Google Analytics, but you can opt out of all data sharing and I imagine Google would be in a lot of trouble if they didn't honour that.
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#123If this is your personal website, one option to consider is dropping the analytics completely. Do you really need to know exactly (and it’s not even that exact, since people block or can’t load your analytics) how many people viewed your blog posts? Anecdotally, if you put your email at the bottom of the page you’ll get a pretty good idea just from the number of people who send you one.
> Anecdotally, if you put your email at the bottom of the page you’ll get a pretty good idea just from the number of people who send you one. You can't be serious. Who in this day and age reads an article and thinks "Hmm, that was useful, I'll send the author a note of thanks"? This might have been the case in 1995 when there were only a few websites around, and Internet use was considered leisure time and not part a…
Hah, speak for yourself. These aren't as uncommon as you think.
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#124Is this an ad?
Yeah, this article was submitted by a SaaS marketing expert: https://markosaric.com/
There are some misleading parts of the article, which makes it even worse (e.g. by default Google uses the data from GA to profile users).
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#125Yes! I've just removed GA from one of my pet projects (shameless plug https://golang.cafe ) - And started using Cloudflare NS https://www.cloudflare.com/dns/ . Now I get users/analytics reports at DNS level. No bloated JS trackers, no privacy policies and weird stuff and I can track visits even when adblockers are enabled. This would definitely be overestimated as bots would be counted in but it seems pretty accurate…
How does Cloudflare NS deal with caching resolvers?
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#126The correct proposition instead would be to stop analytics on your website, period. There's many sites that benefit greatly from the insight, but I'd argue they're a minority. Your personal blog doesn't need analytics. Let's be honest, for many people, analytics is just a way to feed their ego — my ramblings reached 100 people, so you could say I'm kind of a big deal. Google is, obviously, very well aware of this tar…
With any website it's important to know how many visitors it is receiving. In the context of a blog knowing you're getting a lot of traffic can motivate you to publish more content and knowing more about your visitors can also feed into what sort of content you publish. You could look at your server logs, of course, but analytics is easier to set up and gives you higher quality data than something like AWStats. Since…
How does embedded script provide better data? You mean if the page is delivered from network cache you still get analytics or something else?
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who in this day and age reads an article and thinks "Hmm, that was useful, I'll send the author a note of thanks"? I do. Maybe you should, too?
For what it's worth I find it minorly annoying when people send me emails about my posts. I'm happy for people to comment on them, but typically an email is an invitation to have a private discussion and I'd much rather talk publicly ( https://www.jefftk.com/p/comment-dont-message )
And on the flip side, there are people like Noam Chomsky who reply to all emails they receive:
https://www.reddit.com/r/chomsky/comments/6a23eg/how_long_do...
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#128The first reason is about Google being evil. They may well be. However unless your alternative is as good, or better or has a unique selling point that GA doesn't have you will find people won't use it.
Don't tell me about how your competitor is bad. Tell me what you offer in comparison to your competitor.
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#129I have a hobby blog that I'm trying to run for Browser (~3 lines of JS) -> API Gateway -> SQS Queue -> Lambda (ETLs queue into) -> Athena. I was originally just going to use Postgres, but RDS/Aurora are expensive and running Postgres in EC2 is going to be at least as much work (configuring SSH, process management, backups, monitoring, logging, image building, networking, etc). My custom plan is ~$3/month all-in provi…
Your choice is, of course, your choice, but I'd strongly suggest GA for this use case. I understand and agree that Google is in fact evil and we should avoid feeding the beast, but a hobby website using GA is too minor to care about for any of the privacy reasons the author states and if it's fully static pages then ideally the performance will already be light enough that the bloat of GA isn't going to make a differ…
For a light site, Google Analytics may be the majority of its “weight”. It’s not huge, but I’d like to think my readers came to my site for the content and not the analytics so it’s a bit ironic that the ratio doesn’t match that.
Re: An alternative to using Google Analytics on your website
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a big blue button at the top of the page that says "Start Free Trial". Click it and you get this: - Quick and easy to set up - No credit card required - Unlimited use during the trial - From just $6/mo after the trial Looks like a flat fee? Hard to tell from that wording. They should make this more visible on the front-page and elaborate on the " from just $6/mo".
“From X” doesn’t sound like a flat fee, but either tiered or usage based, where the $6/m is the lowest possible you can pay.
I think if they can just be clear that they will do 10 million impressions per property per month for free forever that would clarify the free tier (and match google I think).