Access World Forums - HIT COUNT:-

[Uncle Gizmo]

As of 2021_06_21

Checking AWF hit Count...

THE HIT COUNT is HERE:- https://www.access-programmers.co.uk/forums/threads/checking-awf-hit-count.301964/#post-1657654 I was checking website hits - I do this occasionally. I haven't seen anything published on AWF about it before, so I started this Thread ... Makes interesting reading...

www.access-programmers.co.uk

Access World Forums has had another healthy increase, up by 20%

Utter Access has had a 30% drop, so it doesn't look like they have sorted out the issues with their site, although I haven't been on there, so I have no idea really...


A bit of history... I had been keeping an eye on the performance of Access World Forums for quite a while because as an MS Access developer, I was concerned that the MS Access software might be losing traction in the real world. I thought the number of visits to an MS Access related website may provide some indication of its robustness and longevity.

As you can see, the free version similar web only keeps 6 months worth of data available, I realised I needed to store the history somewhere, hence I started storing the data in a thread on Access World Forums.

I also realised that as the goal was to get an insight into the popularity of MS Access, it would be wise to check another sites Traffic, hence I started monitoring Utter Access, as it was the de facto top MS Access website.

Mod edit: Sorry, I gotta cut the competitors links. Two in the same post.

 

[Jon]

The difficulty in judging the popularity of MS Access software through the amount of web traffic is that there is a huge amount of noise in the data. How Google wants to rank old school forums plays a large part. Their algo often hits most forums of this type at the same time, rather than topic specific. For example, a year or two ago, they cut the traffic to many forums by about 40% on the same day. It happened here too.

Having said all that, I do find it interesting to have a log of the historic data, so well done Uncle for keeping that up.

There are some additional stats and I can give my interpretation of them, for what its worth.

Average Visit Duration: UA has a small group of loyal users, and far less additional traffic from Google, probably most of who are first time visitors. Consequently, this figure gets skewed. Back when UA had more traffic, AWF had a longer Average Visit Duration.

Pages per Visit: Similar reason as above. A small subset of users going to many pages, with few random visitors from Google.

Bounce Rate: Same principle applies. When UA had more traffic, AWF had a lower bounce rate than UA.

I thought I would mention this because it would seem strange that the most popular Access site has worse figures except for traffic. It is due to the fact that at AWF, most visits are from Google. The regular posters here are only a very small portion of visitors. When you have a core of regular users that are swamped by ad hoc users, the regular users weight gets lost in the data. I hope that all made sense.

 

[conception_native_0123]

looks like CJ is right. ms access gaining popularity. I stand corrected that access is prone to corruption. I bet it's like any other software. ha