Re: webpage hit counter in PHP

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> Animesh K wrote:
>> Michael Fesser wrote:
>>> .oO(Krustov)
>>>
>>>> <Jerry Stuckle>
>>>>
>>>>> No counters look "professional". They are just a way for amateurs
>>>>> to pump their egos.
>>>> Is it you who decides for everybody else what is or isnt professional .
>>>
>>> Hit counters are _never_ professional. They are of no interest for the
>>> users (use rand() if you want to show an impressive number to them) and
>>> the real informations are available in the server's logfile.
>>>
>>> Micha
>>
>> People do have page-view (counter) information on websites and it
>> helps the viewer in understanding popularity of that particular page.
>>
>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=mOeuar5LmtU
>>
>> For example this has been viewd 280,XXX times, voted 510 times, and
>> has a 4-* rating. All these are "counters" of different kind and
>> provide a lot of information related to this particular video.
>>
>> Perhaps you mean that stuff like sitemeter is boring, but it isn't
>> completely useless or unprofessional.
>>
>
> And youtube is the latest in professional web design? ROFLMAO!
>
> It's fine for those who need their egos stroked. But it's not
> professional.
>

I realize that there is no point in imparting suggestions to you. You
have your own pre-determined misconceptions.

Michael Fesser wrote:
> .oO(Animesh K)
>
>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
>>> No counters look "professional". They are just a way for amateurs to
>>> pump their egos.
>> Heard of google analytics?
>
> Yes. It's in my filter.
>
> Micha

You can also put the counters (like sitemeter) in your filter. That was
not the point of my post.

In article <DqydnWzRTKd3xQTanZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>Google analytics is not a counter.

Wrong. Did you perhaps mis-type the above sentence? You should
know better.

It's a sophisticated and flexible counter that slices and dices
visits to your web site a number of ways. But in the end, all it's
doing is... counting.

-A

"Animesh K" <animesh1978@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fnla6i$5fv$4@agate.berkeley.edu...
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> Animesh K wrote:
>>> Michael Fesser wrote:
>>>> .oO(Krustov)
>>>>
>>>>> <Jerry Stuckle>
>>>>>
>>>>>> No counters look "professional". They are just a way for amateurs to
>>>>>> pump their egos.
>>>>> Is it you who decides for everybody else what is or isnt professional
>>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> Hit counters are _never_ professional. They are of no interest for the
>>>> users (use rand() if you want to show an impressive number to them) and
>>>> the real informations are available in the server's logfile.
>>>>
>>>> Micha
>>>
>>> People do have page-view (counter) information on websites and it helps
>>> the viewer in understanding popularity of that particular page.
>>>
>>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=mOeuar5LmtU
>>>
>>> For example this has been viewd 280,XXX times, voted 510 times, and has
>>> a 4-* rating. All these are "counters" of different kind and provide a
>>> lot of information related to this particular video.
>>>
>>> Perhaps you mean that stuff like sitemeter is boring, but it isn't
>>> completely useless or unprofessional.
>>>
>>
>> And youtube is the latest in professional web design? ROFLMAO!
>>
>> It's fine for those who need their egos stroked. But it's not
>> professional.
>>
>
> I realize that there is no point in imparting suggestions to you. You have
> your own pre-determined misconceptions.

let me be the third *professional* to say, HIT COUNTERS ARE UNPROFESSIONAL.

this is neither 'pre-determined' nor a 'misconception'...period.

"Animesh K" <animesh1978@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fnla2c$5fv$3@agate.berkeley.edu...
> Floor wrote:
>> Animesh K:
>>
>>> People do have page-view (counter) information on websites and it helps
>>> the viewer in understanding popularity of that particular page.
>>
>> What influence would have the popularity of a page on my search behavior?
>> I mostly seek pages that aren't that popular.
>> Just like entering a super market and knowing what product is bought
>> most. Not relevant whatsoever.
>>
>
>
> For you it may not be the best idea. However, a lot of people sort items
> by popularity. A page view count directly gives the impression of current
> page's popularity.
>
> May be you look for less known things; but imagine a yellow-page website
> and you searched for "camera." Would you like to visit a shop with lowest
> views/responses or would you rather be cautious and visit the more popular
> one?
>
> Again, this is just one example. I am sure you can construct your own.

all hits indicate are the 'path most travelled'. as more than half the
internet users can't tell their ass from a hat, i think taking the 'lowest
views/responses' would be a clear indication that i'm on the *right* path.

:)

"axlq" <axlq@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:fnlakb$leh$1@blue.rahul.net...
> In article <DqydnWzRTKd3xQTanZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>Google analytics is not a counter.
>
> Wrong. Did you perhaps mis-type the above sentence? You should
> know better.
>
> It's a sophisticated and flexible counter that slices and dices
> visits to your web site a number of ways. But in the end, all it's
> doing is... counting.

wrong!!! it's an *analysis package* where ONE of it's features is counting.
counting is NOT the mechanism that make all of it work...nor is counting
even a *primary* feature thereof.

axlq wrote:
> In article <DqydnWzRTKd3xQTanZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
> Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
>> Google analytics is not a counter.
>
> Wrong. Did you perhaps mis-type the above sentence? You should
> know better.
>
> It's a sophisticated and flexible counter that slices and dices
> visits to your web site a number of ways. But in the end, all it's
> doing is... counting.
>
> -A
>

Nope, Google Analytics is much more than a counter. You said so yourself.

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

Steve wrote:
> "axlq" <axlq@spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:fnlakb$leh$1@blue.rahul.net...
>> In article <DqydnWzRTKd3xQTanZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast.com>,
>> Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>> Google analytics is not a counter.
>> Wrong. Did you perhaps mis-type the above sentence? You should
>> know better.
>>
>> It's a sophisticated and flexible counter that slices and dices
>> visits to your web site a number of ways. But in the end, all it's
>> doing is... counting.
>
> wrong!!! it's an *analysis package* where ONE of it's features is counting.
> counting is NOT the mechanism that make all of it work...nor is counting
> even a *primary* feature thereof.
>
>

Analysis is only done after "counting" the data as an array made of
(ip-address, time of hit, country of hit, redirecting page
,page-which-got-hit, ...).

It would be better if you (both) sit and think what a (general) counter
would mean before telling us what google analytics is, or what it is not.

Steve wrote:

> all hits indicate are the 'path most travelled'. as more than half the
> internet users can't tell their ass from a hat, i think taking the 'lowest
> views/responses' would be a clear indication that i'm on the *right* path.
>
> :)
>
>

By that logic, you must be visiting sites which are least popular. bye
bye Nytimes, google, microsoft.com, yahoo, amazon, youtube, digg,
facebook, etc.

"Animesh K" <animesh1978@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fnlvv0$cj6$4@agate.berkeley.edu...
> Steve wrote:
>
>> all hits indicate are the 'path most travelled'. as more than half the
>> internet users can't tell their ass from a hat, i think taking the
>> 'lowest views/responses' would be a clear indication that i'm on the
>> *right* path.
>>
>> :)
>
> By that logic, you must be visiting sites which are least popular. bye bye
> Nytimes, google, microsoft.com, yahoo, amazon, youtube, digg, facebook,
> etc.

uhm, the new york times is never worth reading, google, yahoo, and digg are
not end-point but entry points - matches are by relevance. microsoft is by
relevance, youtube is by download not by visit, and i've no idea what
facebook is...so, it must not be too important.

now of any of those, where does an ordinary counter mechanism fall into the
picture?