[nolok]

Just to be super clear: Google Analytics is not free, the entry version with a limited a visitors/visits it can logs per day is free, then you have to pay to get the full version.

Delivering a quality free product to get companies to sign for the expansive one when their needs increase is a very common marketing system, and allows to keep control of the market despite being vastly out of price. Works for desktop app, mobile app, web services, ... I say this as someone who once had to sign for the full version for a web property I was working at.

This is a matter where people are quick to over react so let's be super clear: I am NOT saying the limit is placed at a reasonable level, nor that companies absolutely need to have the paid version and can't extrapolate enough from the free version data (they absolutely can), nor that Google isn't majorly benefitting in other way than full version sales (they do).

What I'm saying is that "the base version is free and the full version is paid" is a very common thing that doesn't by itself mean anything nefarious is taking place.

[open-source-ux]

"that doesn't by itself mean anything nefarious is taking place"

I don't believe that Google is intentionally doing nefarious things either, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't subject them to close scrutiny over their date collection practices. Whether Google Analytics (GA) is free or not is beside the point. The free version of GA may limit what GA users see, but that doesn't stop Google from capturing far more data than they expose.

This is a company that tracks users on an industrial-size scale that no other online company can match. And yet despite that, most developers are more likely to rush to Google's defence rather than question those data collection practices. (Does a multi-billion company with an army of lawyers need developers to defend it?)

I've said this many times: the hypocrisy that runs through the programming profession when it comes to online tracking really knows no end.

[nolok]

> this is a company that tracks users on an industrial-size scale that no other online company can match. And yet despite that, most developers are more likely to rush to Google's defence rather than question those data collection practices.

If that is what you read in my message, then you are projecting what you want to see on what I actually said. Nothing I said defends Google on that front.

EVERYTHING in your post is completly out of scope of what I said in answer of parent's post. What I said, is that just because some company does something wrong doesn't mean everything that company does is wrong. Or in this case, that while Google is obviously massively syphoning data on a gigantic scale, NO analytics basic tier being free, by itself, isn't an element of wrongdoing.

If anything, your post proves my point, that when they believe they know the end results people are quick to make up the narrative in between to reach it, even if they need to throw the baby with the water too.

[ewngzen]

Exactly, the context is clear ly not related to marketing.

[gator-io]

I wonder if Google uses the data tracked on the pay version for ad targeting also. I bet they do.

[bryanrasmussen]

I suppose that would be up to the phrasing of the paid version contract. I'm betting even if it says no there is wriggle room, especially for that important 3 months fresh data.

[rhizome]

the entry version with a limited a visitors/visits it can logs per day is free

That covers limits on usable data by the user, does it also mean that Google only receives that amount of information?