291–300 of 311 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think he meant queries from caching nameservers that cloudflare does not control. I would argue the majority of queries would be fulfilled by these caching nameservers.
Setting a sufficiently low DNS TTL will take most caching servers out of the question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may remove legal basis for using the data, but it certainly doesn't remove their abilities.
The implication here being Google might be conducting a massive illegal conspiracy to mine data they don’t have rights to use? I do not buy it.
It sounds like a nice product, but sadly it's not exactly why GA is so popular (being a 'nice' product, that is). It is popular, because it's free, relatively easy to implement on any website, requires no self-hosting and powerful, once running. I've checked your website for pricing, but not only there's no word about free tiers, but there isn't even anything on the pricing at all. So, when it comes to majority of GA…
Earlier 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".
A free trial isn't the same as "free for low volume / hobby usage". Not sure if that's what the OP is after, but it's what I'm after. And to head off a couple of popular distortions/digressions: 1. There's a difference between wanting a free hobby tier and believing that I'm owed a free hobby tier. 2. Just because a company should be paid for their work doesn't imply that I'm obligated to use their product.
GA unique visitors: ~350 Cloudflare unique visitors: ~2900
So the difference is pretty overwhelming - I assume that cloudflare count some bot traffic as well or something?
Is it even a reliable source of stats (cloudflare)? If not, why?
I would rather stick to GA.
And, you never pay for analytics on personal website.
Looks nice. Is the account multiuser with separation between sites? If it is, it's a service I'd consider throwing into my maintenance packages as an added value. Most clients don't need the complexity of Google Analytics and with GDPR the data is increasingly out of line with reality, given we load GA based on consent.
Some open source alternatives: - https://ackee.electerious.com/ (Node.js based) - https://github.com/zgoat/goatcounter (Golang) (Commercial Licensed) - https://snowplowanalytics.com (Core-ware) - https://count.ly (Core-ware) https://www.visitor-analytics.io is also a great GDPR compliant alternative (Not open source).
All the other competitors of GA are hobbyists whining about not making enough money. Get a real job and stop complaining about GA!
GA above works for Google and goat.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That customer model is a mental construct of said companies. Just because customer does not proactively ask/request/mention something don't mean that he doesn't care about this. People implicitly assume that their personal information is not used for malicious purposes, despite that it is not true anymore for most of the companies. And in the era of monopolies/doupolies customers don't have vote with their wallet any…
So, a few objections. Most sites that use Google Analytics are not owned by monopolies or duopolies, so that aspect of your comment does not really apply. I also don't know if your claim r.e. malicious purposes is true. Probably depends on whose definition of malicious you're talking about. > That customer model is a mental construct of said companies. Well enough, but as I said, it's the one they care about. You see…
(1): https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2014/03/metadata_surv...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find that for information search intent is a poor pre-qualifier for sales leads.
Evidence says otherwise. Hard data shows that conversions happen the most through these advertising networks. Can't deny the obvious. Unless you want us all to go back to the pre-Internet era where we cold called clients and vendors with a hope of getting leads. We have technology for a reason. Not all tech is bad. Not all advertising is bad either. It is the intent that matters.
Information search. The last time you looked up how to do something, for example, you bought a product off of a Google ad?
What do you define as a "conversion?" I specifically said "sales." People in the ad biz want to define "conversion" as something else- but those of us paying for the ads want to make a sale. If somebody (or a bot) who has no intention of buying clicks on the ad it's a mistake for both of us. Yet with Google anyway, any attempt I make to keep people from mis-clicking (by putting a price in the ad, for example, to indicate up front that if you're looking for free this is not your link) earns me a penalty by reducing something deceptively labeled as my "quality score."
I would love to see the numbers you are referring to, though. Maybe something would occur to me to help me see how to navigate the mess.