4 ms·
Honestly, I should add the point that client-side A/B testing is the devil and should be avoided in the first place.
by csswizardry 2y ago
Honestly, I should add the point that client-side A/B testing is the devil and should be avoided in the first place.
- wizzwizz4 2y agoBut sorting all the paragraphs in alphabetical order increased reader engagement metrics! How would I ever have discovered readers wanted that without A/B testing?
- CM30 2y agoIdeally it should be on the server side, so you're right there. Client side A/B testing isn't the best way to handle things. However, it's sometimes a necessary evil due to: 1. The original company not budgeting time/effort from their existing dev teams to work on A/B testing, and wanting to outsource it instead. 2. Said company and their tech department being nervous about letting outsiders actually access the source code for their site/app. 3. Or said company wanting the analytics/features that VWO/Target/Optimisely/whatever offer, and not wanting to have code up the same analytics toolbox themself.
- csswizardry 2y agoAll three of your points are correct, so please don’t resent my response: Client-side A/B testing exists because ‘we should be able to do this without a deploy’. And they’re right.