Do you use Analog?

Web Statistics Analyzer...

[madcat]

Is Analog the best route to take for Web statistics? Or is it as subjective as it seems...

Do you know for a fact there is something better than Analog?

For a neophyte, Analog is a bit hairy. But if I take the time to try and understand it so I can implement it for every site I make, I would like it to be top notch.

Any suggestion would be great, I have to start tracking who is coming to my clients sites pronto.

Thanks-

[cfx211]

I have found no problems with analog and accuracy. Setting up any of these programs is a little hairy and a bit of a pain. Webtrends is probably the easiest one I have gotten going, but it requires $$ which Analog does not.

One thing I do not like about analog is that it does not attempt a default try of counting uniques and visits. Some packages will count the IP address/user agent combination as your visits figure until you set up cookies.

Unfortunately there is no combination of "quick and easy" and being reassured about accuracy. You will have to pull some log files down and go through them by hand to make sure that your stats package and you agree on the counts. Access is usually a good way to do this.

[ukgimp]

h*ttp://awstats.sourceforge.net/docs/awstats_compare.html

madcat

here is a little comparison. I personaly like webalizer. Whatever you use you will need to get into the configuration file so you can cut out the rubbish,

Cheer

[madcat]

Thanks ukgimp, that's what I needed to get started.

[bill]

Analog has some great sample configuration files in the example folder that contain just about all the tracking options you could need. Just tweak one of those files and you'll eventually get what you want. I think it might be worth your while to spend the time to learn Analog. It can be very educational.

[chiyo]

We are a long time analog user. And yes it did take us a bt of time to config properly. On the upsdide we know exactly what it is doing in the box and making config changes now is very easy. Flexibility is analogs strong point.

If you need pretty reports for clients, webtrends is probably the leader of the pack, but the cost is prohibitive for anyone not making revenue on producing those reports for clients. For us analoge provides the best deal of flexibility vis a vis simplicity vis a vis transparency/accuracy.

Most important point is that no matter what program you use, no matter how pretty and authoritive the reports are made out to be, they are still working from the same limited and curddy raw data. Raw logs. They were always designed to track bandwidth use by different users for server admins and management.

Some pakages like webtreands for example try to "add bits on" by using hidden gifs and cookies, but these all add to the blur and have major problems themselves as well.

Bottom line there is absolutely no way you can accurately identify unique users, but you can use the reports to identify trends and lots of other useful tidbits. Most free packages can do this well. What others charge you extra for is 90% cosmetics.