5 ms·

Sigh. We're drawing conclusions from Compete again? I've said this before and I'll say it again; using Compete for quantitative traffic comparisons is flawed,

Sigh. We're drawing conclusions from Compete again? I've said this before and I'll say it again; using Compete for quantitative traffic comparisons is flawed, particularly with social sites that utilize embeddable content. Their data has been proven wrong countless times. Until recently, Compete claimed Reddit (http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/) had less traffic than Digg (http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/). I don't have anything against Google+. But lets hold off on the congratulatory praise until we're sure the growth is real.

Trufa 14y ago
According to compete Digg is bigger that Reddit and growing.
- vladd 14y ago
  No, it's not bigger nor growing: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/
  - Trufa 14y ago
    My apologies, I can't seem to put them side by side, but I'm pretty sure when I checked some time ago that was the case. I clearly isn't any more.
jedberg 14y ago
Seconded. Compete's numbers are just made up. I know for sure they are off by more than an order of magnitude for reddit (or at least were a year ago).
- Josh2600hz 14y ago
  Most of the traffic tracking on the web involves plugins (generally in the form of a toolbar). I don't know about you guys, but I haven't had a 3rd party toolbar in my browser interface in a long time. Compete, Alexa, etc. they're all tracking people who don't understand technology.
  - pestaa 14y ago
    I generally agree with your sentiment, but let's not get carried away: using 3rd party toolbars does not automatically render you unaware of technology.
    - eli 14y ago
      No, but it makes for a very non-representative sample. Consider the number of people who lack the administrative rights to install a toolbar on the computer they use most often.
  - spindritf 14y ago
    > Compete, Alexa, etc. they're all tracking people who don't understand technology. That would mean that G+ is even stronger as it seems mainly popular with the tech crowd.
  - betterth 14y ago
    But it IS fair to say that the demographics of the set of users who have toolbars installed into their browser is different than those who do not. Specifically, those that have them installed are more likely to be non-tech users than those without. That's my guess with 0 data to back it up (but plenty of useless anecdotes!)
  - jcampbell1 14y ago
    Compete buys samples of traffic from ISPs as its primary datasource. Your toolbar theory is incorrect.
- jcampbell1 14y ago
  Compete's numbers are pretty good, you just have to understand the source. Digg showed more traffic, because Compete's datasource is US ISP logs, and any site with a digg button was added to digg's traffic. The comparing reddit/digg on compete doesn't make much sense because of the digg button penetration. Just like comparing linkedin to google plus is stupid because many google properties make requests to plus.google.com. Compete is a valuable tool, you just need to learn how to use it appropriately. Learn when it is reasonable to compare sites using it.
  - obtu 14y ago
    That's a reasonable explanation, but it's dishonest for Compete to put these numbers on a graph labelled "unique visitors". The Google+ poster didn't have any inkling about what the numbers represent.
toemetoch 14y ago
Agreed. According to one of Google's own services, google+ is pretty much dead: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=google+plus&graph=weekly_img&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=google+plus&graph=wee... compare with fb: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=facebook&graph=weekly_img&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=facebook&graph=weekly... edit: thank you downvoters for illustrating the bias on HN. A fake stats piece promoting google as #1 on the frontpage? This place is turning into /. but with more google employees. I'm out.
- eli 14y ago
  Ugh. You can't divine traffic numbers from search volume and news mentions. If that were the case, Mitt Romney should start a social network because he's crushing Facebook: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney&graph=weekly_img&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney&graph=weekly_i...
  - toemetoch 14y ago
    lol, romney doesn't even register when compared to fb: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney,+facebook&graph=weekly_img&sort=1&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney,+facebook&grap... red=fb, blue= romney The reason this is relevant in the discussion is that when you type in the url in chrome (arguably the top browser) the word in the domain and subdomain count as search words that show up in trends. So when you type "plus" for the g+ url it's added to trends. You can check that little fact by looking at the trends for "plus".
    - tomkarlo 14y ago
      If you've already been on Plus, and you're in chrome or (I think) Firefox, it won't do a search when you type "plus" as the top autocomplete suggestion will be "http://plus.google.com http://plus.google.com. To search, you'd have to key down the list of suggestions.
- alex_t 14y ago
  if you look the number on the axis they are pretty much the same, but facebook didnt have any spike...
vibrunazo 14y ago
Uh? It's actually saying reddit is bigger (1.8m) and growing, while digg is smaller (1.3m) and shrinking.
- faggotvibrunazo 14y ago
  That's what "until recently" means.

Trufa 14y ago

According to compete Digg is bigger that Reddit and growing.

vladd 14y ago
No, it's not bigger nor growing: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/digg.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/ http://siteanalytics.compete.com/reddit.com/
- Trufa 14y ago
  My apologies, I can't seem to put them side by side, but I'm pretty sure when I checked some time ago that was the case. I clearly isn't any more.

jedberg 14y ago

Seconded. Compete's numbers are just made up. I know for sure they are off by more than an order of magnitude for reddit (or at least were a year ago).

Josh2600hz 14y ago
Most of the traffic tracking on the web involves plugins (generally in the form of a toolbar). I don't know about you guys, but I haven't had a 3rd party toolbar in my browser interface in a long time. Compete, Alexa, etc. they're all tracking people who don't understand technology.
- pestaa 14y ago
  I generally agree with your sentiment, but let's not get carried away: using 3rd party toolbars does not automatically render you unaware of technology.
  - eli 14y ago
    No, but it makes for a very non-representative sample. Consider the number of people who lack the administrative rights to install a toolbar on the computer they use most often.
- spindritf 14y ago
  > Compete, Alexa, etc. they're all tracking people who don't understand technology. That would mean that G+ is even stronger as it seems mainly popular with the tech crowd.
- betterth 14y ago
  But it IS fair to say that the demographics of the set of users who have toolbars installed into their browser is different than those who do not. Specifically, those that have them installed are more likely to be non-tech users than those without. That's my guess with 0 data to back it up (but plenty of useless anecdotes!)
- jcampbell1 14y ago
  Compete buys samples of traffic from ISPs as its primary datasource. Your toolbar theory is incorrect.
jcampbell1 14y ago
Compete's numbers are pretty good, you just have to understand the source. Digg showed more traffic, because Compete's datasource is US ISP logs, and any site with a digg button was added to digg's traffic. The comparing reddit/digg on compete doesn't make much sense because of the digg button penetration. Just like comparing linkedin to google plus is stupid because many google properties make requests to plus.google.com. Compete is a valuable tool, you just need to learn how to use it appropriately. Learn when it is reasonable to compare sites using it.
- obtu 14y ago
  That's a reasonable explanation, but it's dishonest for Compete to put these numbers on a graph labelled "unique visitors". The Google+ poster didn't have any inkling about what the numbers represent.

toemetoch 14y ago

Agreed. According to one of Google's own services, google+ is pretty much dead: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=google+plus&graph=weekly_img&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=google+plus&graph=wee... compare with fb: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=facebook&graph=weekly_img&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=facebook&graph=weekly... edit: thank you downvoters for illustrating the bias on HN. A fake stats piece promoting google as #1 on the frontpage? This place is turning into /. but with more google employees. I'm out.

eli 14y ago
Ugh. You can't divine traffic numbers from search volume and news mentions. If that were the case, Mitt Romney should start a social network because he's crushing Facebook: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney&graph=weekly_img&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney&graph=weekly_i...
- toemetoch 14y ago
  lol, romney doesn't even register when compared to fb: http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney,+facebook&graph=weekly_img&sort=1&sa=N http://www.google.com/trends/viz?q=romney,+facebook&grap... red=fb, blue= romney The reason this is relevant in the discussion is that when you type in the url in chrome (arguably the top browser) the word in the domain and subdomain count as search words that show up in trends. So when you type "plus" for the g+ url it's added to trends. You can check that little fact by looking at the trends for "plus".
  - tomkarlo 14y ago
    If you've already been on Plus, and you're in chrome or (I think) Firefox, it won't do a search when you type "plus" as the top autocomplete suggestion will be "http://plus.google.com http://plus.google.com. To search, you'd have to key down the list of suggestions.
alex_t 14y ago
if you look the number on the axis they are pretty much the same, but facebook didnt have any spike...

vibrunazo 14y ago

Uh? It's actually saying reddit is bigger (1.8m) and growing, while digg is smaller (1.3m) and shrinking.

faggotvibrunazo 14y ago
That's what "until recently" means.