| 6:48 pm on Nov 14, 2005 (gmt 0)|
that is soooooo slooooowwww for me right now! my 6 MBit line is looking at google with a sad face :-(
| 2:20 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm going to try it out on one site which is hosted on a server I don't control and which has a terrible stats package associated with it.
I would agree with the basic sentiment that Google Analytics is a useful little tool, but not one which can replace logfile analysis programs. The fact that Google holds very detailed visitor information for a particular site or network of sites (and the use of this service on all your domains would make your network transparent to Google even if you don't interlink) means that if you value such data then you should avoid using the service.
There is a reason why the service is being offered for "free" - Google can profit enormously from the aggregate data that they are collecting supposedly on your behalf.
| 3:32 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It said that it supports directory(e.g. www.site.com/directory/) but I was unable to add an URL which has "/" character to Analytics.
| 4:43 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Ridiculous, 14 hours and still no stats - they promised 12 hours... waste of my time so far...
| 9:11 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Now 21 hours and still no stats.
Has anyone had their stats updated?
| 9:37 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I seem to be in the same boat as the rest of you.
added the code nearly 22 hrs ago now and no stats showing up.
| 9:50 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
28 hours - no stats
| 10:02 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Does anyone else worry how other search engines might react to you having Google code all over your site?
It's like hanging a sign saying 'I am Google's #*$!' around your neck.
| 10:47 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Try to escape the slashes with a \ (when you block an ip, the points are also escaped). I don=t know if ti will work though
| 11:24 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
its free stop #*$!in'!
| 11:43 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
26 hours no stats
| 11:47 am on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
25 hours no stats
| 12:09 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|It's like hanging a sign saying 'I am Google's #*$!' around your neck. |
I will not hear such blasphemy! Google is Mother, Google is Father.
| 1:10 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
if i push status, the system says it can't detect, but it is on the page. Is this bugging or what?
| 1:51 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
They probably forgot the 'beta' sign
| 2:54 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
24 Hours... nothing. I did find it odd that they released a product that wasn't "Beta"
| 3:06 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
No stats here, either. We're testing it on three sites. One thing we don't like is having to put it in the <head> section. For one thing, not ALL of my sites with many many pages are dynamically generated by database, and I don't tend to use includes for the stuff in the <head> sections, particularly when I need to pay serious attention to search engine optimization. It'd be easier if I could just stick the code in an include statement for, say, the navigation. The other problem is, when it's included in the <head> statement, we're seeing it slow down the page load, in some cases significantly. It has to go out to google-analytics.com before it will load the rest of the page, and that can really drag things down.
| 3:14 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I'm running mine just after the body tag... I know, not what they said to do, but it appears to be collecting stats. Guess we'll see if I get reports or not :)
| 3:17 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
It is a little bit unfair, we bought Urchin 4 (100 user license) about 3 years ago when Urchin was urchin and we have offered a nice little service for a modest premium. Now it is free from Google and I have to surmise my investment is now worthless.
| 3:20 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Has anyone received any stats?
| 3:23 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|Has anyone received any stats? |
Not me - started 8 AM EST yesterday.
| 3:54 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I have created an account. What should I write under point "Default page"?
Edit Profile Information
Default page [?]:
| 5:23 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I know it's only loaded once, the first time the user shows up at the site. But the first page is the most important page to load quickly. First impressions count, ya know, and page load speed is critical to user experience.
- Is it possible to put it at the end of the page? Would the user not notice the download time there?
- Has anyone tried this on dialup? How is the user experience?
- Maybe I'll setup old school AdWords tracking to test two different landing pages, one with the download and one without. That would be interesting, yes?
20K may not seem like much, but best practices say to keep your pages below 60K. As if the web isn't slow enought already, now every site will have another 20K download for the first page you view.
| 5:30 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
You think a one time occurence on a single site is going to disuade users... It could be so many factors including a persons own internet connection, I don't think a single load like that is likely to dissuade people....
But who knows. I don't disagree with the first impressions, I just think the average visitor's threshold for issues is above what this would cause.
| 5:34 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
|I'm running mine just after the body tag... I know, not what they said to do, but it appears to be collecting stats. Guess we'll see if I get reports or not :) |
Yeah I am not good at following directions, so originally I put it in the footer of several sites. Seems to have been detected just fine, but then I moved them all to the header.. But i imagine if it detects it it finds it, it will report data.
I imagine they tell you to put it in the header because it is the way to assure the most data gets recorded. If it loads at the end it is possible the page stops loading or something happens before it gets to the script and that data will not be recorded.
| 5:55 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Doesn't work in my version of Firefox (new beta)
| 6:03 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
All I can say is, I originally put the code towards the bottom, and even though I could see it in the source, the Google Admin thing said it couldn't detect it - so I moved all the code back to the <head>, and it slowed down the page. (It calls back to google-analytics.com, and I don't think the rest of the page will load until the <head> section does, though I could be wrong on that) I still don't show that Google recognizes the code in any of my sites, though, so something's wrong either on my end or on Google's. I suspect it's Google's.
| 6:30 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I agree I think Google must find a way to cut the size down on this code!
A bit much, and Google should know... and adjust.
| 6:31 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
i've been detected :) Look like they have a lot of subscribers and can't handle it (just a guess) Patience is the bottom line!
| 6:54 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
Anyone have a better number for how long until the report data becomes available? I saw that most people were still at the 24hrs+ mark. Personally, I'm at 21hrs.
| 7:00 pm on Nov 15, 2005 (gmt 0)|
I am (was?) an Urchin paying customer. All of our reports are currently gone!
... so I'm not sure that the problem is related to a delay from install.
Trying to get to the bottom of it now.