A/B split testing on PHP built website

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

Geoff Berrow wrote:

Message-ID: <gbqq48$bkk$2@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>

>Which could be - and is completely the wrong way to analyze a technical
>issue.

>
>
What's technical about it? The A/B testing can show interesting results
as the tutorial points out. They have a case study where they have a
page displaying a picture of an adviser and one without. They found out
that people responded much better to the one without the picture,
contrary to what one might expect.
>
These are not technical issues. It's to do with psychology, aesthetics,
useability, customer profiling etc etc. Admittedly, off topic for this
group.

You really should READ the thread before responding.

Finding the reason for poor performance is 100% technical. It has
nothing to do with A/B testing - especially the human interaction study
you quoted.

Performance has EVERYTHING to do with technical issues!

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

[Geoff Berrow]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

Message-ID: <gbrj1v$m4c$1@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:

>You really should READ the thread before responding.

I have read it. Admittedly I fitted in a trip to Northern Ireland in
between so I may not have my eye completely on the ball but I think I
know what the OP is after.

>
>Finding the reason for poor performance is 100% technical. It has
>nothing to do with A/B testing - especially the human interaction study
>you quoted.
>
>Performance has EVERYTHING to do with technical issues!

I keep feeling we are talking at cross purposes here. The way I'm
reading it the OP is using the word 'performance' to mean the results he
gets from the site. We don't know how he is measuring this. It may be
number of hits, conversion of enquiries to sales, number of sign ups -
we don't know, but the OP has said he means performance in marketing
terms.

But very often the word 'performance' is used in other ways, the time
taken to fetch a set of results for instance.

Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.
--
Geoff Berrow 011000100110110 0010000000110
001101101011011 001000110111101 100111001011
100110001101101 111001011100111 010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

Geoff Berrow wrote:

Message-ID: <gbrj1v$m4c$1@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>

>You really should READ the thread before responding.

>
I have read it. Admittedly I fitted in a trip to Northern Ireland in
between so I may not have my eye completely on the ball but I think I
know what the OP is after.

>Finding the reason for poor performance is 100% technical. It has
>nothing to do with A/B testing - especially the human interaction study
>you quoted.
>>
>Performance has EVERYTHING to do with technical issues!

>
I keep feeling we are talking at cross purposes here. The way I'm
reading it the OP is using the word 'performance' to mean the results he
gets from the site. We don't know how he is measuring this. It may be
number of hits, conversion of enquiries to sales, number of sign ups -
we don't know, but the OP has said he means performance in marketing
terms.
>
But very often the word 'performance' is used in other ways, the time
taken to fetch a set of results for instance.
>

To virtually anyone else, "Performanc e" is how fast the site is
responding. That has been the definition of "Performanc e" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.

Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
waste of time in this scenario.

Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performanc e", he
is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.


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

[Geoff Berrow]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

Message-ID: <gbt22m$2qe$1@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:

>To virtually anyone else, "Performanc e" is how fast the site is
>responding. That has been the definition of "Performanc e" when it comes
>to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.

Ah well,prior to programming, I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.

>

>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
>takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
>doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
>waste of time in this scenario.

>
>Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performanc e", he
>is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.

Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread. ;-)
--
Geoff Berrow 011000100110110 0010000000110
001101101011011 001000110111101 100111001011
100110001101101 111001011100111 010101101011
http://slipperyhill.co.uk - http://4theweb.co.uk

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

Geoff Berrow wrote:

Message-ID: <gbt22m$2qe$1@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:
>

>To virtually anyone else, "Performanc e" is how fast the site is
>responding. That has been the definition of "Performanc e" when it comes
>to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.

>
Ah well,prior to programming, I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.
>

>>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
>>takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
>>doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
>>waste of time in this scenario.

>Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performanc e", he
>is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.

>
Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread. ;-)

Ah, then I understand your position, and I apologize for the remark
about not reading the thread.

However, if he wants to do something like that, a random A/B split is
not a good way to go, either. Rather, he should have two sites and have
them linked together so people can switch back and forth between the
two. Solicit opinions from people as to which they like better, and
monitor sales from both sites.

It would provide much more information than trying to pull statistics
from and A/B split.

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

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fad=A5?=]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

On Sep 30, 12:44 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attg lobal.netwrote:

Geoff Berrow wrote:

Message-ID: <gbt22m$2q...@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
contained the following:

>

To virtually anyone else, "Performanc e" is how fast the site is
responding.  That has been the definition of "Performanc e" when it comes
to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.

>

Ah well,prior to programming,  I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
and PR so my definition is not so fixed.

>

>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
>takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh.  I'll agree that
>doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
>waste of time in this scenario.
Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performanc e", he
is free to do so.  But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.

>

Agreed, not in a technical group like this one.  But it does show that I
did indeed read the thread.  ;-)

>
Ah, then I understand your position, and I apologize for the remark
about not reading the thread.
>
However, if he wants to do something like that, a random A/B split is
not a good way to go, either.  Rather, he should have two sites and have
them linked together so people can switch back and forth between the
two.  Solicit opinions from people as to which they like better, and
monitor sales from both sites.
>
It would provide much more information than trying to pull statistics
from and A/B split.
>
--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstuck...@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

That sounds interesting Jerry. I will definitely propose that to my
client, sounds more beneficial to me.
By the way, by performance I meant the marketing aspect of it and not
the technical. Sorry if I was ambiguous in my vocabulary.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: A/B split testing on PHP built website

Fad¥ wrote:

On Sep 30, 12:44 pm, Jerry Stuckle <jstuck...@attg lobal.netwrote:

>Geoff Berrow wrote:

>>Message-ID: <gbt22m$2q...@r egistered.motza rella.orgfrom Jerry Stuckle
>>contained the following:
>>>To virtually anyone else, "Performanc e" is how fast the site is
>>>responding . That has been the definition of "Performanc e" when it comes
>>>to code for the over 40 years I've been programming.
>>Ah well,prior to programming, I had quite a lengthy spell in Marketing
>>and PR so my definition is not so fixed.
>>>>Of course, it may be that people do not buy from the site because it
>>>>takes 30 seconds for the shopping cart to refresh. I'll agree that
>>>>doing an A/B test on the colour of the front page will be a complete
>>>>waste of time in this scenario.
>>>Of course, if the op wants to redefine the meaning of "Performanc e", he
>>>is free to do so. But he shouldn't expect clear responses when he does.
>>Agreed, not in a technical group like this one. But it does show that I
>>did indeed read the thread. ;-)

>Ah, then I understand your position, and I apologize for the remark
>about not reading the thread.
>>
>However, if he wants to do something like that, a random A/B split is
>not a good way to go, either. Rather, he should have two sites and have
>them linked together so people can switch back and forth between the
>two. Solicit opinions from people as to which they like better, and
>monitor sales from both sites.
>>
>It would provide much more information than trying to pull statistics
>from and A/B split.
>>
>--
>============== ====
>Remove the "x" from my email address
>Jerry Stuckle
>JDS Computer Training Corp.
>jstuck...@attg lobal.net
>============== ====

>
That sounds interesting Jerry. I will definitely propose that to my
client, sounds more beneficial to me.
By the way, by performance I meant the marketing aspect of it and not
the technical. Sorry if I was ambiguous in my vocabulary.
>

Ok, in that case you definitely want two separate sites. People will
get very upset if they get a different site every time they visit. And
randomly changing between two sites is even worse - it looks like your
client can't make up his mind which he wants. Even worse will be the
search engines.

My comments earlier were related to the same look/feel but different
code underneath.

Additionally, I suspect your client is expecting miracles. The number
of people why buy is a very small portion of those who visit.

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