3 ms·
Wow. That's a little rude. I'm arguing that URL shorteners have had nothing to do with the popularity of Google Analytics, which is the source of urchin parame
by seldo 15y ago
Wow. That's a little rude.
I'm arguing that URL shorteners have had nothing to do with the popularity of Google Analytics, which is the source of urchin parameters. The dominance of Google and the massive profit incentive around accurately tracking adwords and adsense is what's driving that. Consumers don't care what their URLs look like, so it doesn't matter whether URL shorteners obfuscate them.
I recognize that shortened URLs are troublesome for a bookmarking service, but they are hardly insurmountable. I'm not sure I understand why you'd have so much hate for us.
(And for the record, URL shortening is not our primary product)
- SoftwareMaven 15y agoWhat he's saying is that, because url shorteners hide the Urchin crap, it has allowed it to become more pervasive, since most people don't see the Urchin crap until it's hidden far to the right in the browser.
- mattmcknight 15y agoCouldn't you say the same thing about an ordinary hyperlink on a page? I see the text of the link and even less of the URL than you see in the address bar in the 64 char preview at the bottom of the browser when I hover. It's only a very small percentage of the population that copies the destination URL and strips out unnecessary query parameters. The URL shorteners just an inferior version of regular anchor tags...
- sbierwagen 15y agoShortened URLs are also troublesome for anyone who likes clicking on links, due to the propensity for URL shorteners to run out of money and die, breaking tens of thousands of links.