I don't get it - it is a nice sentiment, but the crux of the argument seems to "go with your gut." The reason web analytics has been so popular is that you can actually improve your product significantly without as much subjectivity. Before web analytics, going with your gut was the only option. It turns out, threading events through a funnel that show you lost 90% of your users because your button doesn't show up on certain screen sizes is a meaningful capability. The question from there is how far do you go with it, but I don't think it makes any sense to both reject it and go on to propose such a fuzzy, underdefined alternative as "you'll gain intuition about if you're making connections."
Having built a number of apps, I don't know how to gain such intution once the userbase becomes too large to interact with directly enough to grok it. It's very easy to be fooled by a vocal minority of people who complain about your app sucking when the majority are getting value from it. Without data and analytics, it's easy to be pushed around by your most vocal users, because your gut is saying you should listen to them. Sometimes you should, sometimes you shouldn't, but the difference between the two can often be determined by looking at the data to get a bigger, less biased picture of what is actually going on with your app.
> improve your product significantly without as much subjectivity
It's fake objectivity that often leads to a race to the boottom.
Between "engagement" as a terrible proxy for user happiness/success and the idea that it's more important and better if nobody can fail to use your app's "UX" than it is if it to enables a smaller number of people who take the time to learn to do really great things, all wrapped up in the VC driven dream of hypermegablitzscaling, all a reliance on analytics does is guarantee mediocrity.
I want software created by people who care enough not to look at the data.
Analytics data are like emotions: a valuable source of information which should not be used as a direct controlling signal. It should be first thought through.
I didn’t say it was objective. I said it allows you to be less subjective. I have no idea how anyone could think otherwise unless you’ve never had, for example, analytics show you your visual design or interactive flow is literally broken on specific but rare device/platform/browser/etc combos. (Just one example.)
As usual, it’s possible to be stupid and abuse tools, but what I wrote presumes you’re not doing something stupid. If you think it’s impossible to not be stupid when it comes to this tool, this is false.
I've personally never been in a situation where analytics drove change. Even mere A/B testing seems like a ghost in (most?) organizations, where management or designers decide to force through their personal preferences.
That said, I would love to join such an organization. Any suggestions on where to find data driven jobs?
My experiences suggest a large measure of caution. Many organizations describe themselves as data-driven and many actually do try. However humans are humans and many will be “data driven” when it aligns with what they want to do, otherwise it’s off for “more data” or a “new perspective”. In other words sometimes data driven means use data when it supports my already staked out position. I hate to be so cynical but I can’t help it.
The pendulum has swung too far. We quantify everything now, chasing numbers to the point of losing our sense of quality and craftsmanship. There's a huge difference between "going with your gut" and the ability to assess, qualify, and reason about something. To understand how and why something works or doesn't. Whether from first principles or experience.
Numbers provide a happy path for consensus. If the "why" of your project is to please as many people as possible, then web analytics probably works great. I'm not arguing they're categorically useless, only trying to surface the unspoken costs I see bear out in our industry from relying on them so heavily.
What I wrote wasn't an insistent denial, try steelmanning next time. Extrapolating the magnitude of problems from user research is hard, since you're still sampling a distribution.
The point is that there is a swath of failure modes that only become apparent when you actually have instrumentation point at them first. QA can’t fish these out.
Absolutely, and a good reminder that your web analytics is only one source of data you can use when making decisions. Sites and apps generate so much interesting quantitative and qualitative information that is important to compare and validate assumptions.
Yes! Early stage businesses can get bogged down in "next feature folly" - keep adding and adding as each new (bespoke?) client comes on. Then the product has features baked in for narrow cases and turns off the larger part of the bell curve.
My line in the sand is: never build a feature on the first request. Ideate, research, measure others opinion of the same features.
I build websites for small business, and since the beginning have used Google Analytics. What used to be a valuable tool that I would eagerly tell my clients to utilize, has now become an overly complex nightmare I loathe to install and rarely recommend to my clients. I recently had a client ask to use StatCounter.com (my reaction: "they're still around?!?") and it was refreshingly simple, much like the original Google Analytics.
I'm sure the new GA is super powerful, but most people just want to see how many "hits" they got, what content is most popular, and where the visitors came from. Google would do well with a simplified Analytics service just for small business.
Once you go down the optimization route, if your Google Analytics isn't super valuable it's an easy bloat to eliminate.
Another vote for plausible here. After reading what you described, I thought that’s exactly what you need. It’s cheap, especially if you have a lot of sites. It tells me more than I need to know and is wonderful as far as page weight and performance.
I wrote my own little thing that just counts page hits/referrers, but only keeps aggregates for older data (e.g. the hourly data is kept for a week, daily data for a year, weekly data for 10 years, and only yearly data kept forever). It also keeps track of how long the page took to load, and how long it took to generate on the server if the page provides it, and that's it. I can make a new project/page and get a tracking snippet for it in one second, and then I barely ever even look at the stats, which saves even more time. But should something crazy happen, I would like to be able to, and that's all I need really.
plausible imo is the way it should be. Embed the script, done. Bonus: No cookies & cookie banner. They even have instructions on how to circumvent adblockers.
GA4 is actually the simple version of GA. Lots of stuff is hidden. So it looks lol Google did exactly what you wanted )‘simplified Analytics service’).
However, if you want an even simpler solution: Matamo is totally free as well.
GA4 which I've migrated about 250 clients to (that was a ton of fun /s) simplifies some things, but complicates others. I know of the alternatives but run into anther issue relating to cost: Most of my clients are not willing to pay (more) for analytics which is why GA remains the default (free) choice. Do I raise prices for everyone and include an analytics alternative? Or do I stop using GA and only give (alternative) analytics to clients that pay extra? I'm leaning towards the latter.
> (And I didn't need analytics to understand something wasn't working lol.)
I mean, you did need feedback though - you read a comment on HN, which gave you the feedback, with upvotes on the comment indicating that it's probably an issue that more people care about.
One significant difference is that the feedback was "active", though: Someone actively decided to write the comment and other people probably actively decided to upvote it. I fully agree that this is a way better way of feedback than effectively putting up hidden cameras everywhere and surveiling every step of your users without them knowing.
Thanks for all the constructive criticism on the pagination. It's an experiment I'm playing around with on my personal site (which is what they're for right?). Definitely sounds like I should have tested it on a few more devices, lol. Will work on a more readable view.
In the meantime, a few helpers:
- Scrolling "past" the end of the page will move to the next page.
- Left arrow, Right arrow will nav back and forward.
I have to hit right arrow anywhere from 2-4 times to nav forward; left arrow 3-5 times to nav back. Seems to be fine if I wait longer than a second or so after the page transition - otherwise I see a blue border around the edge of the tab.
Anyway, as somebody that builds things with no trackers, I agree with you and appreciate you posting this! The one thing I want to know is if/when a page or website is picked up somewhere, I'd just like to see where the traffic came from so I can respond or engage with people. I find absolute traffic numbers, and most of the data you get from analytics tools a distraction and a net negative, especially given the privacy and performance issues that come with their JS.
In general, for a webpage that is mostly text I would like to be able to read it with a text-only browser (e.g. Reader View on Firefox). Having all the text on one page, or at least navigation links at the bottom, would really help.
I am sure readers with disabilities (motion or vision impaired, for example) would appreciate this too!
Articles like this always seem to miss the ways that the big analytics platforms are used in real life by marketing and product teams. If all you are doing is measuring page hits, then Google Analytics is overkill and you should be using one of the privacy focused alternatives. However, if you care about connecting your marketing tactics to larger strategic goals and measuring the impact of your work, a properly configured analytics stack is still really important.
Interesting thesis. When used as intended, web analytics should be only one input to an overall strategy -- not the sole driver for all decisions. But I can see how an organization with KPI's tied to web analytics will lose objectivity -- especially when someone's job performance is tied to the analytics. It's a slippery slope.
I love this quote at the end: "Caring about quality is the heart of craftsmanship. Until you're hooked into those outcomes, micro-optimizing the individual parts is pointless."
Perhaps, as we move towards a web dominated by AI agents, quality will supersede metrics.
I'm not even sure what I just read. I thought it was going to explain why they don't use any analytics anymore and all I got as a 10,000 foot answer that could be summarized as, "Well, because!"
I don't use analytics on any of my services simply because I don't like analytics and people tracking me, so why would I do it to others?
Does it mean I don't track my business metrics? No. I still measure general conversion rates from sign up to payers. I measure things like sign ups per-month. You don't need analytics to track that. Basic metrics combined with a "CHANGELOG" file with dates/releases/fixes is plenty for my solo business. Want to know what I did in January to spike sign ups or more payers? Look at my change log.
As I understood it, the idea is that analytics are the wrong answer, or rather, if they are an answer, at all, you're asking the wrong questions. Which I, in turn, interpret as a signal for more opinionated approaches.
(Meaning, if you follow these kind of metrics closely, you may actually miss crucial opportunities, as these will always bind you to the perceived mainstream. Moreover, these analytics are still sparse and there may be hidden variables. E.g, you may have changed something in January, but what happened else in January, elsewhere, which may have had some impact? Finally, these metrics are always about intermediate goals and partial results, but never about the entire product or mission. Metrics for these are found elsewhere.)
Disclaimer: I abandoned all analytics for my own projects some years ago, and I do not miss anything. So I may be somewhat sympathetic to this.
Readit News
Having built a number of apps, I don't know how to gain such intution once the userbase becomes too large to interact with directly enough to grok it. It's very easy to be fooled by a vocal minority of people who complain about your app sucking when the majority are getting value from it. Without data and analytics, it's easy to be pushed around by your most vocal users, because your gut is saying you should listen to them. Sometimes you should, sometimes you shouldn't, but the difference between the two can often be determined by looking at the data to get a bigger, less biased picture of what is actually going on with your app.
It's fake objectivity that often leads to a race to the boottom.
Between "engagement" as a terrible proxy for user happiness/success and the idea that it's more important and better if nobody can fail to use your app's "UX" than it is if it to enables a smaller number of people who take the time to learn to do really great things, all wrapped up in the VC driven dream of hypermegablitzscaling, all a reliance on analytics does is guarantee mediocrity.
I want software created by people who care enough not to look at the data.
As usual, it’s possible to be stupid and abuse tools, but what I wrote presumes you’re not doing something stupid. If you think it’s impossible to not be stupid when it comes to this tool, this is false.
That said, I would love to join such an organization. Any suggestions on where to find data driven jobs?
My experiences suggest a large measure of caution. Many organizations describe themselves as data-driven and many actually do try. However humans are humans and many will be “data driven” when it aligns with what they want to do, otherwise it’s off for “more data” or a “new perspective”. In other words sometimes data driven means use data when it supports my already staked out position. I hate to be so cynical but I can’t help it.
Numbers provide a happy path for consensus. If the "why" of your project is to please as many people as possible, then web analytics probably works great. I'm not arguing they're categorically useless, only trying to surface the unspoken costs I see bear out in our industry from relying on them so heavily.
The analytics people insistent denial that usability research ever existed seems to have reached a new level.
Then you'd run the app on all screen sizes before each git push and notice that the button doesn't always show up, or isn't always clickable.
Does this apply to "feature requests" by a minority whereby the majority then has to accept those "features".
My line in the sand is: never build a feature on the first request. Ideate, research, measure others opinion of the same features.
One should have a tight beta group for this.
How does analytics do that? A mobile usability scanner might pick that up, but analytics?
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
I'm sure the new GA is super powerful, but most people just want to see how many "hits" they got, what content is most popular, and where the visitors came from. Google would do well with a simplified Analytics service just for small business.
Once you go down the optimization route, if your Google Analytics isn't super valuable it's an easy bloat to eliminate.
The point is that we shouldn't be using analytics _at all_.
I'm not sure if I agree with that or not yet - I have to think about it more. My gut says that's right.
Maybe they should run some analytics and check the bounce rates!
(And I didn't need analytics to understand something wasn't working lol.)
I mean, you did need feedback though - you read a comment on HN, which gave you the feedback, with upvotes on the comment indicating that it's probably an issue that more people care about.
One significant difference is that the feedback was "active", though: Someone actively decided to write the comment and other people probably actively decided to upvote it. I fully agree that this is a way better way of feedback than effectively putting up hidden cameras everywhere and surveiling every step of your users without them knowing.
Dead Comment
In the meantime, a few helpers:
- Scrolling "past" the end of the page will move to the next page.
- Left arrow, Right arrow will nav back and forward.
- On mobile, swiping will do the same.
- Space and enter key will nav to the next page.
Anyway, as somebody that builds things with no trackers, I agree with you and appreciate you posting this! The one thing I want to know is if/when a page or website is picked up somewhere, I'd just like to see where the traffic came from so I can respond or engage with people. I find absolute traffic numbers, and most of the data you get from analytics tools a distraction and a net negative, especially given the privacy and performance issues that come with their JS.
I am sure readers with disabilities (motion or vision impaired, for example) would appreciate this too!
Except when it doesn't, was my experience.
I really like https://www.portent.com/onetrick/ for anyone looking for an intro to how analytics enhances marketing work.
I love this quote at the end: "Caring about quality is the heart of craftsmanship. Until you're hooked into those outcomes, micro-optimizing the individual parts is pointless."
Perhaps, as we move towards a web dominated by AI agents, quality will supersede metrics.
I don't use analytics on any of my services simply because I don't like analytics and people tracking me, so why would I do it to others?
Does it mean I don't track my business metrics? No. I still measure general conversion rates from sign up to payers. I measure things like sign ups per-month. You don't need analytics to track that. Basic metrics combined with a "CHANGELOG" file with dates/releases/fixes is plenty for my solo business. Want to know what I did in January to spike sign ups or more payers? Look at my change log.
(Meaning, if you follow these kind of metrics closely, you may actually miss crucial opportunities, as these will always bind you to the perceived mainstream. Moreover, these analytics are still sparse and there may be hidden variables. E.g, you may have changed something in January, but what happened else in January, elsewhere, which may have had some impact? Finally, these metrics are always about intermediate goals and partial results, but never about the entire product or mission. Metrics for these are found elsewhere.)
Disclaimer: I abandoned all analytics for my own projects some years ago, and I do not miss anything. So I may be somewhat sympathetic to this.
Scrolling goes to the next page unless I want you to scroll to read, then it goes to the next page when you're done scrolling the content. Beautiful.
Exactly why most sites don't do this. But it's special!