Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

17511Re: [webanalytics] Re: Analtyics voor mobile phones.

Expand Messages
  • Steve McInerney
    May 31, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Craig Sullivan
      <craig.sullivan@...> wrote:
      > * > Personally, I would say outright that JavaScript tagging is
      >
      > less
      >> > accurate (in the dictionary sense of accurate) than log analysis.
      >
      > This is simply not true - this is what I was attempting to point out.

      We can agree to disagree, but I still refer to the StoneTemple report
      that states that even using the same collection technology (page
      tagging) from various vendors gave an *enormous* difference in the
      numbers.

      If the same collection technology can't even be in the same ballpark?
      Then statements that page tagging is more "accurate" (by whatever
      definition) are IMHO highly suspect. :-)


      > The limitations of both methods are known but the effects that caching
      > has on the accuracy of logfile analysis is far greater than those that
      > afflict non cached tags.

      Is it?
      Given how dynamic many pages are? Sure the images and css will get
      cached, but page tagging won't see those anyway.
      And given what your company does Craig, if this were true (caching),
      wouldn't you have issues with users cross polluting shopping baskets?
      A "cookie" is, in effect, part of a page (I'm being really simplistic
      here) so....???

      I'd also add that you're pre judging the user base of any given website.
      I know for my personal site - which generates a moderate amount of
      traffic - the user base is emphatically largely invisible to page
      tagging methods. Appallingly so. But then they are also a highly
      technical audience too... :-)


      Cheers!
      - Steve
    • Show all 10 messages in this topic