mattab
commented
4 years ago Hi Dan, thanks for the feedback! Here are my thoughts:
Is this worth mentioning on the landing page?
it might be, and i've wondered about this as well, but then we would have to create a public FAQ to document the workaround (we do know about it and have told a few people when they asked but never publicly documented it so far...). because we are also privacy advocates, documenting workarounds to ad-blocking is a mixed message to send... of course there is a case for creating the FAQ: eg.
- after all people may be collecting consent from users and want all the data tracked (even if users happen to have blocker enabled in their browser),
- or when you are not tracking any personal data for sure (and also say disabled cookies) and not sharing the data anywhere etc. then people wouldn't generally mind being tracked to help the sites we visit leverage the data for improvements, etc...
With GA, you won't track a whopping 30% of your visitor, whether you're under or over the cap.
I don't think all ad-blocking tech mentioned in this 30% would also block Matomo. It is up to 30% but often 15% or less. but it's definitely growing slow & steady. From our recent internal study where we compared JS requests to the same requests tracked server side (only for some ecommerce orders) we saw 10-15% of matomo trackers missed.
I was not aware of the GA capping mentioned in #15899. Are there any actual numbers available?
Anyway, there's another big reason why a webmaster might prefer Matomo over GA:
Ad blockers, and more and more browsers (Brave etc.) are simply blocking GA.
With an on-premise installation of Matomo, you can name your tracking script whatever you wish, and it won't get blocked. (And you can also ask your visitors for consent to be tracked!)
Is this worth mentioning on the landing page? With GA, you won't track a whopping 30% of your visitor, whether you're under or over the cap.