3 ms·
Of course this could be read another way: How Google's poorly thought out Analytics code cost a company $500k/year. Whenever you plug somebody else's code int
by jasonkester 16y ago
Of course this could be read another way: How Google's poorly thought out Analytics code cost a company $500k/year.
Whenever you plug somebody else's code into your site, you're taking a risk. Try browsing the web with your browser set to pop up warnings on every javascript error, and you'll see how bad most of the scripts people plug into their site really are.
- pierrefar 16y agoYou can also spin it as the customer not keeping updated with the latest code that fixes known issues. How much can you really blame Google on customers using years-old code?
- goatforce5 16y agoRight - they updated their code ages ago, and IIRC they sent out an email explaining the problem and encouraging people to put the new code in.
- jasonkester 16y agoIndeed. That's the point I was trying to make. It's not an issue of whether it's Google's fault that the company didn't update their tracking code. It's the fact that when you start integrating 3rd party stuff into your codebase, it suddenly becomes your job to keep on top of every one of those plugins to make sure they stay working.
- keltex 16y agoI don't see any reason why Google couldn't add to their javascript tracking code the ability to detect if a non-SSL script sits on an SSL page. They would then flag it in the analytics control panel. Whoever is monitoring analytics could spot it right away rather than waiting for their consultant to point it out months later.