4 ms·

No, this is the anatomy of a perfect landing page: <% ab_test('determine_the_best_page_with_numbers_to_back_you_up', ['page1', 'page2']) do |action_name| %>

No, this is the anatomy of a perfect landing page: <% ab_test('determine_the_best_page_with_numbers_to_back_you_up', ['page1', 'page2']) do |action_name| %> render :action => action_name <% end %> (http://www.bingocardcreator.com/abingo http://www.bingocardcreator.com/abingo)

swombat 16y ago
I don't know why you're being downvoted. This is correct. Landing pages can and should be a/b-tested to the death. If you're gonna a/b-test anything, it's gotta be your landing page!
- maxklein 16y ago
  You know, everyone talks about testing, but I betya almost nobody does it.
- ccollins 16y ago
  Thanks - maybe downvoted because there is little explanation. So just to clarify: Many people have an opinion about the perfect landing page based on some narrow experience. See http://www.google.com/search?q=perfect+landing+page http://www.google.com/search?q=perfect+landing+page for examples. Absorbing these guidelines provides a good starting point for any landing page optimization campaign, but only a starting point. Claiming you have created a "perfect" landing page is simply wrong. There is no such thing as a perfect landing page. Through rigorous A/B/n & multivariate testing you can identify pages with better conversion rates and discard poor performers. It is also important to note that this optimization is not necessarily transferable to different ad messaging, user segments, products, or conversion goals.
  - jasonlotito 16y ago
    Probably because you missed the point. They aren't saying copy/paste this page and you've done it. Rather, they are providing a clear set of guidelines toward reaching your perfect landing page. #10 on their list, in fact, discuss A/B testing. However, that advise alone is useless. Testing whether A or B is better is useless if both A and B don't have a good foundation.
JeffL 16y ago
Well, you also have to know what to try. I had a local maximum on my landing page and wasn't getting it any better until I started reading articles like this, and my latest one is 60% better than the old. A/B testing alone isn't always enough.
patio11 16y ago
It hadn't occurred to me that A/Bingo could do that. (Swap templates.) Spiffy.
- swah 16y ago
  I'm confused, aren't you the creator?
  - patio11 16y ago
    The specific trick he is doing is an interaction between Rails and the API I wrote, which is fortuitous but not planned. It wasn't unlikely, because A/Bingo is designed to "feel like Ruby", but I had never envisioned the software being used in that fashion. (I always do A/B tests on particular elements within a page.)
    - inerte 16y ago
      I know nothing about Ruby/Rails or A/Bingo, but isn't head and body or html just elements? AFAIDK you could test a whole lot more. In other words, haven't you ever tried to A/B test the full page? :)
      - patio11 16y ago
        Historically, I avoid Big Bang A/B tests because a) I used to have a 5 hour a week budget, which is enough to do heading tests but not quite enough to do full page rewrites and b) I have the design skills of a hamster who fell into the Christmas eggnog and drowned.
      - steveklabnik 16y ago
        To confirm, your intuitions are correct. I wonder if it's harder to figure out _what_ is better about your split tests as the tests themselves become larger, though.
limedaring 16y ago
Doesn't #10 on the original page mention "Always Be Testing"? Nothing's wrong with starting out with some great guidelines, and then testing it to death.
tel 16y ago
A short primer in unconstrained, high-dimensional, non-linear global optimization (over time!) You can't do it. So you need more than just testing. Unconstrained and high-dimensional means that your search space is IMMENSE. Non-linear means that the optimal designs may be arbitrarily twisty, very small, fractaline and chaotic, and, most importantly, unconnected. Temporal dependence means that even if you magically find a good solution, it may fade with time. Fortunately, we never have to do that because we use an incredible amount of prior design information (craft) to ensure that our search spaces are much smaller. This page provides an overview of that information (and even includes a call to test) which will hopefully put you somewhere in the neighborhood of a useful page and inform you of what direction to go. If you "just had to test" then there'd be no need for art, science, literature, stock markets, language, thermodynamics, technique, craft, effort. Computers would have already solved everything (not that we would have ever invented them). My opinion is that testing is vital because it's your only consistent, trust-worthy way to measure your value function (conversion rates). It's how you put a stick in the water to measure depth. That is only one tiny part of a complete solution no matter how important it is.

swombat 16y ago

I don't know why you're being downvoted. This is correct. Landing pages can and should be a/b-tested to the death. If you're gonna a/b-test anything, it's gotta be your landing page!

maxklein 16y ago
You know, everyone talks about testing, but I betya almost nobody does it.
ccollins 16y ago
Thanks - maybe downvoted because there is little explanation. So just to clarify: Many people have an opinion about the perfect landing page based on some narrow experience. See http://www.google.com/search?q=perfect+landing+page http://www.google.com/search?q=perfect+landing+page for examples. Absorbing these guidelines provides a good starting point for any landing page optimization campaign, but only a starting point. Claiming you have created a "perfect" landing page is simply wrong. There is no such thing as a perfect landing page. Through rigorous A/B/n & multivariate testing you can identify pages with better conversion rates and discard poor performers. It is also important to note that this optimization is not necessarily transferable to different ad messaging, user segments, products, or conversion goals.
- jasonlotito 16y ago
  Probably because you missed the point. They aren't saying copy/paste this page and you've done it. Rather, they are providing a clear set of guidelines toward reaching your perfect landing page. #10 on their list, in fact, discuss A/B testing. However, that advise alone is useless. Testing whether A or B is better is useless if both A and B don't have a good foundation.

JeffL 16y ago

Well, you also have to know what to try. I had a local maximum on my landing page and wasn't getting it any better until I started reading articles like this, and my latest one is 60% better than the old. A/B testing alone isn't always enough.

patio11 16y ago

It hadn't occurred to me that A/Bingo could do that. (Swap templates.) Spiffy.

swah 16y ago
I'm confused, aren't you the creator?
- patio11 16y ago
  The specific trick he is doing is an interaction between Rails and the API I wrote, which is fortuitous but not planned. It wasn't unlikely, because A/Bingo is designed to "feel like Ruby", but I had never envisioned the software being used in that fashion. (I always do A/B tests on particular elements within a page.)
  - inerte 16y ago
    I know nothing about Ruby/Rails or A/Bingo, but isn't head and body or html just elements? AFAIDK you could test a whole lot more. In other words, haven't you ever tried to A/B test the full page? :)
    - patio11 16y ago
      Historically, I avoid Big Bang A/B tests because a) I used to have a 5 hour a week budget, which is enough to do heading tests but not quite enough to do full page rewrites and b) I have the design skills of a hamster who fell into the Christmas eggnog and drowned.
    - steveklabnik 16y ago
      To confirm, your intuitions are correct. I wonder if it's harder to figure out _what_ is better about your split tests as the tests themselves become larger, though.

limedaring 16y ago

Doesn't #10 on the original page mention "Always Be Testing"? Nothing's wrong with starting out with some great guidelines, and then testing it to death.

tel 16y ago

A short primer in unconstrained, high-dimensional, non-linear global optimization (over time!) You can't do it. So you need more than just testing. Unconstrained and high-dimensional means that your search space is IMMENSE. Non-linear means that the optimal designs may be arbitrarily twisty, very small, fractaline and chaotic, and, most importantly, unconnected. Temporal dependence means that even if you magically find a good solution, it may fade with time. Fortunately, we never have to do that because we use an incredible amount of prior design information (craft) to ensure that our search spaces are much smaller. This page provides an overview of that information (and even includes a call to test) which will hopefully put you somewhere in the neighborhood of a useful page and inform you of what direction to go. If you "just had to test" then there'd be no need for art, science, literature, stock markets, language, thermodynamics, technique, craft, effort. Computers would have already solved everything (not that we would have ever invented them). My opinion is that testing is vital because it's your only consistent, trust-worthy way to measure your value function (conversion rates). It's how you put a stick in the water to measure depth. That is only one tiny part of a complete solution no matter how important it is.