By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,747 Members | 2,011 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,747 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

A/B split testing on PHP built website

P: n/a
Hello guys,

I want to do kinda of an A/B split testing on a website I run. I just
created a new version but I need to keep both version running and see
which one will perform better. First, I'm not sure if I'm in the right
group.
How can I randomly let a user enter from the index.php page and keep
the same URL. So the splitting is being done in the backend, I don't
want the users to see for example in the url /new/index.php and /
index.php.

Thank you.
Sep 27 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
21 Replies


P: n/a
Message-ID:
<21**********************************@k30g2000hse. googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
>How can I randomly let a user enter from the index.php page and keep
the same URL. So the splitting is being done in the backend, I don't
want the users to see for example in the url /new/index.php and /
index.php.
Use include() to randomly include either A or B
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk
Sep 27 '08 #2

P: n/a
On Sep 27, 12:54*pm, Geoff Berrow <blthe...@ckdog.co.ukwrote:
Message-ID:
<21f49151-796b-4e87-aae3-081058595...@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
How can I randomly let a user enter from the index.php page and keep
the same URL. So the splitting is being done in the backend, I don't
want the users to see for example in the url /new/index.php and /
index.php.

Use include() to randomly include either A or B
--
Geoff Berrow *0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011http://slipperyhill.co.uk-http://4theweb.co.uk
Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?

Thanks for the help
Sep 27 '08 #3

P: n/a
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 27, 12:54 pm, Geoff Berrow <blthe...@ckdog.co.ukwrote:
>Message-ID:
<21f49151-796b-4e87-aae3-081058595...@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
>>How can I randomly let a user enter from the index.php page and keep
the same URL. So the splitting is being done in the backend, I don't
want the users to see for example in the url /new/index.php and /
index.php.
Use include() to randomly include either A or B
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011http://slipperyhill.co.uk-http://4theweb.co.uk

Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?

Thanks for the help
You can't do that from PHP - it's handled by the server before PHP ever
gets involved.

Geoff's suggestion is the best from the PHP end. Otherwise you're
looking at the server.

But the real question here is - why do you need this? Is there a
problem with the current site?

And beware - if you're on a shared host, any measurements will be
subject to the load the other sites are also placing on the server, as
well as network traffic, etc.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 27 '08 #4

P: n/a
Message-ID:
<7d**********************************@e39g2000hsf. googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
>Use include() to randomly include either A or B
>Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
Yes. You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk
Sep 28 '08 #5

P: n/a
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID:
<7d**********************************@e39g2000hsf. googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
>>Use include() to randomly include either A or B
>Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?

Yes. You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
It doesn't help. By the time the <basetag takes effect, the page is
already loaded.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 28 '08 #6

P: n/a
On Sep 27, 11:12*pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID:
<7d4a2c89-d9ad-44c8-a168-9a9d71e44...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
>Use include() to randomly include either A or B
Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
Yes. *You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.

It doesn't help. * By the time the <basetag takes effect, the page is
already loaded.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
well sorry if i didn't make myself clear :S i appreciate the help :)
I'm going to explain the scenario. I have the new website in the /
wwwroot/ folder and the old one in a folder inside the new website
called v2 because the new site it's the v3. I want any user when he
types www.mydomain.com for example to go randomly either to wwwroot/
index.php or to wwwroot/v2/index.php. Each one of the sites would have
different analytics so that i can see the performance of both (A/B
split testing).

Please let me know if I need to clarify even more.

thanks a lot!!
Sep 28 '08 #7

P: n/a
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 27, 11:12 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
>Geoff Berrow wrote:
>>Message-ID:
<7d4a2c89-d9ad-44c8-a168-9a9d71e44...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
Use include() to randomly include either A or B
Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
Yes. You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
It doesn't help. By the time the <basetag takes effect, the page is
already loaded.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
well sorry if i didn't make myself clear :S i appreciate the help :)
I'm going to explain the scenario. I have the new website in the /
wwwroot/ folder and the old one in a folder inside the new website
called v2 because the new site it's the v3. I want any user when he
types www.mydomain.com for example to go randomly either to wwwroot/
index.php or to wwwroot/v2/index.php. Each one of the sites would have
different analytics so that i can see the performance of both (A/B
split testing).

Please let me know if I need to clarify even more.

thanks a lot!!
As I said - you can get a load balancer and place them on two different
servers, then compare the statistics between them. Or, you can do like
Geoff suggested and include one set of files or the other.

But you never told us WHY you need such a thing. Is the current site
having performance problems?

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 28 '08 #8

P: n/a
On Sep 28, 9:47*am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 27, 11:12 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID:
<7d4a2c89-d9ad-44c8-a168-9a9d71e44...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
Use include() to randomly include either A or B
Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
Yes. *You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
It doesn't help. * By the time the <basetag takes effect, the pageis
already loaded.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
well sorry if i didn't make myself clear :S i appreciate the help :)
I'm going to explain the scenario. I have the new website in the /
wwwroot/ folder and the old one in a folder inside the new website
called v2 because the new site it's the v3. I want any user when he
typeswww.mydomain.comfor example to go randomly either to wwwroot/
index.php or to wwwroot/v2/index.php. Each one of the sites would have
different analytics so that i can see the performance of both (A/B
split testing).
Please let me know if I need to clarify even more.
thanks a lot!!

As I said - you can get a load balancer and place them on two different
servers, then compare the statistics between them. *Or, you can do like
Geoff suggested and include one set of files or the other.

But you never told us WHY you need such a thing. *Is the current site
having performance problems?

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
Well the old website was not performing well, up to the client's
expectation so we made a new version of the site. But still we need to
have both online to measure the performance of the new site.
First, I thought it would be something easy. Like create an index.php
file that would randomly formard the user request to either /v2/
index.php (old) or /v3/index.php (old). But the issue here is that
even with this forward I still want to user to see /index.php instead
of /v2 or v3/index.php and the same for all the other files in both
folders. So I want it to be transparent for the users.

What do you think? can it be done without a load balancer and the use
of 2 different servers?
As I understood Geoff mentioned the use of include. So if I understand
correctly i would have to create for each file in the folders v2/v3 a
file that would be the root folder and that would randomly include v2
or v3?

Thanks again!
Sep 28 '08 #9

P: n/a
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 28, 9:47 am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
>FadĽ wrote:
>>On Sep 27, 11:12 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID:
<7d4a2c89-d9ad-44c8-a168-9a9d71e44...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.comfrom
FadĽ contained the following:
>>Use include() to randomly include either A or B
>Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
>folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
>give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
Yes. You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
It doesn't help. By the time the <basetag takes effect, the page is
already loaded.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
well sorry if i didn't make myself clear :S i appreciate the help :)
I'm going to explain the scenario. I have the new website in the /
wwwroot/ folder and the old one in a folder inside the new website
called v2 because the new site it's the v3. I want any user when he
typeswww.mydomain.comfor example to go randomly either to wwwroot/
index.php or to wwwroot/v2/index.php. Each one of the sites would have
different analytics so that i can see the performance of both (A/B
split testing).
Please let me know if I need to clarify even more.
thanks a lot!!
As I said - you can get a load balancer and place them on two different
servers, then compare the statistics between them. Or, you can do like
Geoff suggested and include one set of files or the other.

But you never told us WHY you need such a thing. Is the current site
having performance problems?

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================

Well the old website was not performing well, up to the client's
expectation so we made a new version of the site. But still we need to
have both online to measure the performance of the new site.
First, I thought it would be something easy. Like create an index.php
file that would randomly formard the user request to either /v2/
index.php (old) or /v3/index.php (old). But the issue here is that
even with this forward I still want to user to see /index.php instead
of /v2 or v3/index.php and the same for all the other files in both
folders. So I want it to be transparent for the users.
Why wasn't the old site performing well? Did you do any analysis to see
what the problem was, or did you just write a new site, hoping it would
perform better?
What do you think? can it be done without a load balancer and the use
of 2 different servers?
As I understood Geoff mentioned the use of include. So if I understand
correctly i would have to create for each file in the folders v2/v3 a
file that would be the root folder and that would randomly include v2
or v3?

Thanks again!
Not unless you use the include() method Geoff indicated.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 28 '08 #10

P: n/a
On Sep 28, 3:41*pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 28, 9:47 am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 27, 11:12 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID:
<7d4a2c89-d9ad-44c8-a168-9a9d71e44...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>from
FadĽ contained the following:
>Use include() to randomly include either A or B
Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are ina
folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
Yes. *You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
It doesn't help. * By the time the <basetag takes effect, the page is
already loaded.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
well sorry if i didn't make myself clear :S i appreciate the help :)
I'm going to explain the scenario. I have the new website in the /
wwwroot/ folder and the old one in a folder inside the new website
called v2 because the new site it's the v3. I want any user when he
typeswww.mydomain.comforexample to go randomly either to wwwroot/
index.php or to wwwroot/v2/index.php. Each one of the sites would have
different analytics so that i can see the performance of both (A/B
split testing).
Please let me know if I need to clarify even more.
thanks a lot!!
As I said - you can get a load balancer and place them on two different
servers, then compare the statistics between them. *Or, you can do like
Geoff suggested and include one set of files or the other.
But you never told us WHY you need such a thing. *Is the current site
having performance problems?
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
Well the old website was not performing well, up to the client's
expectation so we made a new version of the site. But still we need to
have both online to measure the performance of the new site.
First, I thought it would be something easy. Like create an index.php
file that would randomly formard the user request to either /v2/
index.php (old) or /v3/index.php (old). But the issue here is that
even with this forward I still want to user to see /index.php instead
of /v2 or v3/index.php and the same for all the other files in both
folders. So I want it to be transparent for the users.

Why wasn't the old site performing well? *Did you do any analysis to see
what the problem was, or did you just write a new site, hoping it would
perform better?
What do you think? can it be done without a load balancer and the use
of 2 different servers?
As I understood Geoff mentioned the use of include. So if I understand
correctly i would have to create for each file in the folders v2/v3 a
file that would be the root folder and that would randomly include v2
or v3?
Thanks again!

Not unless you use the include() method Geoff indicated.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
Well, I'm not the one in charge for analyzing the performance of the
site. My client wants to do the A/B split testing. Obviously, he
wasn't satisfied by the performance of the old web site in a marketing
perspective.
Anyway thanks a lot for your thoughts. I really appreciate it.
Cheers
Sep 29 '08 #11

P: n/a
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 28, 3:41 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
>FadĽ wrote:
>>On Sep 28, 9:47 am, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 27, 11:12 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
>Geoff Berrow wrote:
>>Message-ID:
>><7d4a2c89-d9ad-44c8-a168-9a9d71e44...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.comfrom
>>FadĽ contained the following:
>>>>Use include() to randomly include either A or B
>>>Aha I see what you mean. But let's say each of the versions are in a
>>>folder (new and old folders). I created index.php that would randomly
>>>give access the index.php in the new and old folders?
>>Yes. You'll need to use the <basetag if you are using folders.
>It doesn't help. By the time the <basetag takes effect, the page is
>already loaded.
>--
>==================
>Remove the "x" from my email address
>Jerry Stuckle
>JDS Computer Training Corp.
>jstuck...@attglobal.net
>==================
well sorry if i didn't make myself clear :S i appreciate the help :)
I'm going to explain the scenario. I have the new website in the /
wwwroot/ folder and the old one in a folder inside the new website
called v2 because the new site it's the v3. I want any user when he
typeswww.mydomain.comforexample to go randomly either to wwwroot/
index.php or to wwwroot/v2/index.php. Each one of the sites would have
different analytics so that i can see the performance of both (A/B
split testing).
Please let me know if I need to clarify even more.
thanks a lot!!
As I said - you can get a load balancer and place them on two different
servers, then compare the statistics between them. Or, you can do like
Geoff suggested and include one set of files or the other.
But you never told us WHY you need such a thing. Is the current site
having performance problems?
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
Well the old website was not performing well, up to the client's
expectation so we made a new version of the site. But still we need to
have both online to measure the performance of the new site.
First, I thought it would be something easy. Like create an index.php
file that would randomly formard the user request to either /v2/
index.php (old) or /v3/index.php (old). But the issue here is that
even with this forward I still want to user to see /index.php instead
of /v2 or v3/index.php and the same for all the other files in both
folders. So I want it to be transparent for the users.
Why wasn't the old site performing well? Did you do any analysis to see
what the problem was, or did you just write a new site, hoping it would
perform better?
>>What do you think? can it be done without a load balancer and the use
of 2 different servers?
As I understood Geoff mentioned the use of include. So if I understand
correctly i would have to create for each file in the folders v2/v3 a
file that would be the root folder and that would randomly include v2
or v3?
Thanks again!
Not unless you use the include() method Geoff indicated.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================

Well, I'm not the one in charge for analyzing the performance of the
site. My client wants to do the A/B split testing. Obviously, he
wasn't satisfied by the performance of the old web site in a marketing
perspective.
Anyway thanks a lot for your thoughts. I really appreciate it.
Cheers
Your job as a consultant is to fix his problem.

As I said - you can do the A/B split. It should only cost him a few
thousand dollars for six months forth of analysis (the least I would say
would be valid).

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 29 '08 #12

P: n/a
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>Well, I'm not the one in charge for analyzing the performance of the
site. My client wants to do the A/B split testing. Obviously, he
wasn't satisfied by the performance of the old web site in a marketing
perspective.
Anyway thanks a lot for your thoughts. I really appreciate it.
Cheers

Your job as a consultant is to fix his problem.

As I said - you can do the A/B split. It should only cost him a few
thousand dollars for six months forth of analysis (the least I would say
would be valid).
He's trying to analyse performance from a marketing perspective not a
technical perspective. A/B testing may well be the way to go but you
could also try other market research techniques such as focus groups.

Website optimiser from Google allows this kind of testing. I've not
tried it so I don't know how transparent it is to the user. Here is a
tutorial
http://www.google.com/support/conver...y?answer=77161
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk
Sep 29 '08 #13

P: n/a
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>>Well, I'm not the one in charge for analyzing the performance of the
site. My client wants to do the A/B split testing. Obviously, he
wasn't satisfied by the performance of the old web site in a marketing
perspective.
Anyway thanks a lot for your thoughts. I really appreciate it.
Cheers
Your job as a consultant is to fix his problem.

As I said - you can do the A/B split. It should only cost him a few
thousand dollars for six months forth of analysis (the least I would say
would be valid).

He's trying to analyse performance from a marketing perspective not a
technical perspective. A/B testing may well be the way to go but you
could also try other market research techniques such as focus groups.

Website optimiser from Google allows this kind of testing. I've not
tried it so I don't know how transparent it is to the user. Here is a
tutorial
http://www.google.com/support/conver...y?answer=77161
Which could be - and is completely the wrong way to analyze a technical
issue.

I wonder how the customer got the idea to do such a thing. It isn't
normally what a non-technical person would consider.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 29 '08 #14

P: n/a
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>Which could be - and is completely the wrong way to analyze a technical
issue.

What's technical about it? The A/B testing can show interesting results
as the tutorial points out. They have a case study where they have a
page displaying a picture of an adviser and one without. They found out
that people responded much better to the one without the picture,
contrary to what one might expect.

These are not technical issues. It's to do with psychology, aesthetics,
useability, customer profiling etc etc. Admittedly, off topic for this
group.
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk
Sep 29 '08 #15

P: n/a
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>Which could be - and is completely the wrong way to analyze a technical
issue.


What's technical about it? The A/B testing can show interesting results
as the tutorial points out. They have a case study where they have a
page displaying a picture of an adviser and one without. They found out
that people responded much better to the one without the picture,
contrary to what one might expect.

These are not technical issues. It's to do with psychology, aesthetics,
useability, customer profiling etc etc. Admittedly, off topic for this
group.
You really should READ the thread before responding.

Finding the reason for poor performance is 100% technical. It has
nothing to do with A/B testing - especially the human interaction study
you quoted.

Performance has EVERYTHING to do with technical issues!

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 29 '08 #16

P: n/a
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>You really should READ the thread before responding.
I have read it. Admittedly I fitted in a trip to Northern Ireland in
between so I may not have my eye completely on the ball but I think I
know what the OP is after.
>
Finding the reason for poor performance is 100% technical. It has
nothing to do with A/B testing - especially the human interaction study
you quoted.

Performance has EVERYTHING to do with technical issues!
I keep feeling we are talking at cross purposes here. The way I'm
reading it the OP is using the word 'performance' to mean the results he
gets from the site. We don't know how he is measuring this. It may be
number of hits, conversion of enquiries to sales, number of sign ups -
we don't know, but the OP has said he means performance in marketing
terms.

But very often the word 'performance' is used in other ways, the time
taken to fetch a set of results for instance.

Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk
Sep 30 '08 #17

P: n/a
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>You really should READ the thread before responding.

I have read it. Admittedly I fitted in a trip to Northern Ireland in
between so I may not have my eye completely on the ball but I think I
know what the OP is after.
>Finding the reason for poor performance is 100% technical. It has
nothing to do with A/B testing - especially the human interaction study
you quoted.

Performance has EVERYTHING to do with technical issues!

I keep feeling we are talking at cross purposes here. The way I'm
reading it the OP is using the word 'performance' to mean the results he
gets from the site. We don't know how he is measuring this. It may be
number of hits, conversion of enquiries to sales, number of sign ups -
we don't know, but the OP has said he means performance in marketing
terms.

But very often the word 'performance' is used in other ways, the time
taken to fetch a set of results for instance.
To virtually anyone else, "Performance" is how fast the site is
responding. That has been the definition of "Performance" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.
Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.
Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performance", he
is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 30 '08 #18

P: n/a
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>To virtually anyone else, "Performance" is how fast the site is
responding. That has been the definition of "Performance" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.
Ah well,prior to programming, I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.
>
>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.

Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performance", he
is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.
Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread. ;-)
--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk
Sep 30 '08 #19

P: n/a
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID: <gb**********@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>To virtually anyone else, "Performance" is how fast the site is
responding. That has been the definition of "Performance" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.

Ah well,prior to programming, I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.
>>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.
Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performance", he
is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.

Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread. ;-)
Ah, then I understand your position, and I apologize for the remark
about not reading the thread.

However, if he wants to do something like that, a random A/B split is
not a good way to go, either. Rather, he should have two sites and have
them linked together so people can switch back and forth between the
two. Solicit opinions from people as to which they like better, and
monitor sales from both sites.

It would provide much more information than trying to pull statistics
from and A/B split.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Sep 30 '08 #20

P: n/a
On Sep 30, 12:44*pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
Geoff Berrow wrote:
Message-ID: <gbt22m$2q...@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
To virtually anyone else, "Performance" is how fast the site is
responding. *That has been the definition of "Performance" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.
Ah well,prior to programming, *I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.
>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. *I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.
Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performance", he
is free to do so. *But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.
Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. *But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread. *;-)

Ah, then I understand your position, and I apologize for the remark
about not reading the thread.

However, if he wants to do something like that, a random A/B split is
not a good way to go, either. *Rather, he should have two sites and have
them linked together so people can switch back and forth between the
two. *Solicit opinions from people as to which they like better, and
monitor sales from both sites.

It would provide much more information than trying to pull statistics
from and A/B split.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================
That sounds interesting Jerry. I will definitely propose that to my
client, sounds more beneficial to me.
By the way, by performance I meant the marketing aspect of it and not
the technical. Sorry if I was ambiguous in my vocabulary.
Oct 2 '08 #21

P: n/a
FadĽ wrote:
On Sep 30, 12:44 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attglobal.netwrote:
>Geoff Berrow wrote:
>>Message-ID: <gbt22m$2q...@registered.motzarella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
To virtually anyone else, "Performance" is how fast the site is
responding. That has been the definition of "Performance" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.
Ah well,prior to programming, I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.
Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.
Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performance", he
is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.
Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread. ;-)
Ah, then I understand your position, and I apologize for the remark
about not reading the thread.

However, if he wants to do something like that, a random A/B split is
not a good way to go, either. Rather, he should have two sites and have
them linked together so people can switch back and forth between the
two. Solicit opinions from people as to which they like better, and
monitor sales from both sites.

It would provide much more information than trying to pull statistics
from and A/B split.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attglobal.net
==================

That sounds interesting Jerry. I will definitely propose that to my
client, sounds more beneficial to me.
By the way, by performance I meant the marketing aspect of it and not
the technical. Sorry if I was ambiguous in my vocabulary.
Ok, in that case you definitely want two separate sites. People will
get very upset if they get a different site every time they visit. And
randomly changing between two sites is even worse - it looks like your
client can't make up his mind which he wants. Even worse will be the
search engines.

My comments earlier were related to the same look/feel but different
code underneath.

Additionally, I suspect your client is expecting miracles. The number
of people why buy is a very small portion of those who visit.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Oct 2 '08 #22

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.