A/Bingo 1.0.0 Official Release
kalzumeus.com
kalzumeus.com
I figured I had to "professionalize" A/Bingo a bit because recently from reading my email I get the impression that it is looking less like the 10% time project from my 10% time project and more like "Oh, effity, if this breaks businesses with employees start losing money." So I did a bit of code cleanup, wrote some tests, and created a versioning plan so that folks depending on it are not totally on their own for evaluating whether a particular commit will break stuff if they pull it in.
Since I had the opportunity I also made some changes to the user experience, such as decreasing the amount of code you have to write even further, and incorporating the Minimum Viable Dashboard.
If you aren't A/B testing yet, I want to change that. Tell me what I need to do to make it happen.
Because I believe your "If you aren't A/B testing yet, I want to change that." is beneficial for significant part of HN'ers.
Does A/Bingo also auto-select an alternative if there is a 95% reliability that it's better?
Vanity and A/Bingo have some fundamentally different takes on the problem. This is totally fine -- there are a lot of good ways to do A/B testing just like there are a lot of good ways to parse an HTML document. Use whichever fits your needs.
I'm happy to answer specific implementation questions, but the bumper sticker version is "In general, Vanity wants to be your one-stop measurement shop. A/Bingo wants to make A/B testing so easy you do it automatically, every single time."
GWO makes significant compromises on usability -- both for the site's programmers and the site's users. Previously I recommended it only very hesitatingly, to non-technical marketer types. These days Visual Website Optimizer exists and it is embarrassingly better in every possible way for that audience, including the WYSIWYG interface.
You can read my thoughts on GWO at length in the A/Bingo documentation. http://www.bingocardcreator.com/abingo/compare
It exists to make A/B and Multivariate testing dead-simple for non-technical types :)
Any thoughts on language independent API design for A/B testing?
If you want to write yourself ASP.NET A/B testing stuff, send me an email and I'll tell you what I know about the design tradeoffs.
I'm not sure if there's an equivalent for Subversion.
http://www.bingocardcreator.com/files/abingo.zip
At the moment that is created by hand and so it won't be automatically updated. I'll figure out a more permanent solution later.
For what it's worth, the reason I'm not running git on my Linux box is that I'm a C# guy by choice. ABingo seems like something the .NET world needs, so I want to look into porting it.
I concur that .NET desperately needs an A/B testing framework. Stack Overflow should have one. Give me their worst .NET engineer and two months -- one for writing A/Boverflow and one for writing tests -- I could increase almost any metric on that site by 10%. What is your worst engineer scheduled to do this month that is more important than that?
That's a question I'd like to ask anybody who isn't A/B testing yet. Seriously. What keeps you so busy that you can't adopt a low-risk, battle-tested, low-investment strategy with stupendously scaling returns like A/B testing? (I can only hope that every company with a web page pulled a Google, built one of these internally, and keeps vewwwwy vewwwwy quiet about it for fear of letting people know how easy it is.)
Once that's done (or instead of it because frankly this is more fun), we'll see about getting a drop-in AB component built for ASP.NET too.