Website monitoring – how and why to monitor a website?

Category : Maintenance

I will start with pointing out that this article is not about tracking user traffic, but about availability monitoring, i.e. detecting and reporting website outages.

Availability monitoring

In this service a website is automatically monitored by an external pinger. The mechanism acts like a browser, visits the website every 60 seconds and checks if it functions properly. It records the server’s response (investigates if there were any errors), checks if a timeout occurred. Optionally it can also confirm the presence of a defined phrase.
In the event of encountering a failure, the system sends notifications via email and SMS, sometimes also on an instant messenger. All events are stored in a database, so one can review the history of availability as well as check the availability within a given time frame.

A failure can be credibly identified when there are 2 or 3 monitoring stations located in different regions, i.e. connected to different providers and linked to the monitored website by different routes. A single station reports a failure each time when a connection to the monitored website cannot be established. The problem may just as well lie with the monitoring station or somewhere in between, which is why a failure needs to be confirmed by other, independent stations.

Is it worth it?

I always recommend website monitoring to my customers.
Some people believe that the answer to this question depends on the traffic on a website. But even if a website is rarely accessed, it may happen that a downtime occurs during a key customer’s/potential partner’s/investor’s visit to the site. Every commercial website has a specific aim and every failure means that the aim is not being achieved.

Of course there are many situations where it is obvious and indisputable that monitoring is necessary. Some of them include:

  • websites to which traffic is directed from ongoing advertising campaigns
  • e-commerce websites (all sites where consumers buy goods or services on-line)
  • websites offering services that are accessed using a browser (SaaS)
  • extranets.

Comparison

There are a few website monitoring providers on the market. The price range is almost just as big as the difference in the quality of services. When comparing the prices and characteristics of services I took into account only suppliers who offer 1-minute monitoring. In my opinion a longer time makes website monitoring pointless.

The parameters which I considered are as follows:

Annual fee – regardless of whether it’s possible to pay on a per-month basis, an annual cost has been calculated.

Mobile text alerts included in the package – all mobile operators offer SMS notifications but some may impose additional charges for each message.

Monitoring stations – as I already explained above.

Instant messenger alerts – IM services such as Gtalk, MSN or Jabber may not be typical business tools but many webmasters use them and would appreciate the possibility of receiving alerts this way.

Monitoring of different ports – thanks to this feature not only websites can be monitored, but also mail servers, DNS servers, etc.

Confirming the presence of a given phrase – this option ensures that a given phrase is present in the code of the monitored website. This can be any part of the content or an HTML tag, e.g. “</html>” – finding which means that the entire page was loaded.

Testing forms – the possibility to fill in an Internet form using the monitoring system, e.g. logging in with a user name and password.

Providers

The most expensive provider on the list is WatchMouse – a Dutch company which offers its services in 40 countries worldwide. The world’s largest monitoring network does not justify its price, which is sometimes even 10 times higher than the price some competitors offer.

Service Uptime and dotcom-monitor.com are 2 times cheaper, yet still relatively expensive. Both have a similar offer in terms of basic monitoring, but dotcom-monitor.com also provides more advanced services.

Some companies which fall into the next price level are Pingdom from Sweden and site24x7. The latter belongs to ZOHO, a company which offers probably the widest range of online business applications on the market.

In terms of price, the winner of this comparison is website-monitoring.com, whose quality of services and offer are just as good as those offered by the remaining companies.

Hosting and SLA

Let’s not be deluded and believe that all web hosting providers are honest enough to inform us about every single outage, even the smallest one, and then present the actual level of services they performed at the end of each month. Of course I wish this to everyone. But at the same time it is much safer to use independent monitoring and compare the uptime with the data we receive from our hosting provider.

6 reasons why it is worth having your website administered by specialists

Category : Maintenance

First, let me answer one question:
When is it not worth having your www site administered by specialists?
There are really not many such situations:

Situation A: a company rarely updates its website but that means that is does not treat online activities seriously, which is why we will not dwell on that.

Situation B: a company takes on an employee, a qualified webmaster, to take care of the website. Assuming that he is willing to work overtime from time to time or work on holidays, then an agency may not be necessary.

The end. In any other situation it will be more effective to have specialists manage the content of your website. Why?

website administration

1. CMS is always a compromise

In practice, there are no longer any websites built without CMS – a built-in administration panel. However, every solution like that is a kind of compromise between great possibilities of website content edition and easiness of using. The easier it is to use the panel, the less possibilities the administrator has. The more options and functions, the more complicated and illegible is the administrator’s panel.
Each time after a new website is implemented, the agency provides training in how to use CMS. The instructor carefully demonstrates all functionalities. Next he or she gives exercises to the employees participating in the training. After the training everything seems to be clear.
Unfortunately, after a few days of practice, limitations emerge. The most frequent problem are the limited possibilities of WYSIWYG editor. There are a few applications of this kind on the market but they are all very similar. Each enables you to edit HTML documents while pretending to be Word.
The difference between websites and Office type documents is great. Not getting into much detail, when you edit the content using WYSIWYG editor, sooner or later you will find yourself in a situation where you do not know what to do or where something is simply not doable.
Advanced formatting (e.g. interline spacing, columns, table borders, internal and external margins) requires you to use tricks or simply to have an advanced knowledge of HTML and CSS code.

2. Materials need to be processed

Source materials to be placed on www sites are delivered by different employees and basically they are never ready to be publicised in the Internet. There is no problem with texts. But graphics, files to be downloaded and video, which is becoming more popular, need to be pre-processed. Conversion to an appropriate format, cropping, scaling, upload of large files. Efficient preparation of materials requires you to have knowledge of and to possess different types of software.

3. Time is money

Some content, such as press releases, job offers or special offers, needs to be published at a specific time. A team of specialists will certainly place the new content faster. If that is necessary, they will be ready to perform a given task at a non-standard time, i.e. outside working hours or at weekends.
In some CMS’s you are able to predefine the exact moment of publication. This is a useful functionality but it will not help if the content is not ready until the last moment. And that is prevalent.

4. Burdening your resources also costs

Regardless of the size of the company’s marketing department, the time an employee spends administering the website on their own can be always used in a better way. If the employee is a specialist, it is really a waste of their time. But if they are a manager (which is really not rarely the case) that means quite a loss for the company. And all the more so because the person dealing with CMS in the company very often has to perform the tasks given to them by other departments, such as PR or HR.
An alternative option is to send instructions to the agency via e-mail with the content attached. I once heard a marketer referring to that method of cooperation as “fire & forget”.

5. Long-term support facilitates development

Marketers’ ideas very often go beyond what CMS is able to. Such development requires graphics and/or program modifications. A company which has signed no contract for website administration services has to commission each such modification separately. And that first of all means higher costs (an hour of specialist’s work is always cheaper under a long-term contract) and secondly, the necessity to each time go through the process of accepting the order, signing the contract etc.
When you have specific specialist support services ensured within a month, you can easily develop your website and pursue new e-marketing ideas.

6. Knowledge as added value

No contract guarantees that but in practice, clients can always count on counselling as part of administration services. You can most often be counselled about the content you publicise, architecture of information on the website or usefulness of navigation. The knowledge transferred not infrequently goes beyond the website itself and covers such areas as online advertising or process optimisation in the company.

Finally, I would like to debunk some myths relating to long-term website administration services.

Myth 1: Website administration services are expensive
The source of this prejudice are companies which have old and static websites without CMS or with its very simple variant having very limited possibilities. In such situations, each update must indeed cost more as it requires commitment on the part of the programmer and/or graphic designer.
In a normal situation updates are handled by an administrator, whose working hours are cheaper than the working hours of specialists.
What is more, individual prices under every long-term contract (which provides for monthly payments) are after all cheaper than in the case of one-off orders because the agency cares more about long-term cooperation than about single tasks.

Myth 2: The agency will not cope with a CMS built by someone else
Remember that interactive agencies never specialise only in website administration. That is their additional activity apart from creating web pages. This competence they have guarantees that no administration panel is a secret for them. Besides, a substantial majority of CMS’s are very similar as they are based on the same principles and often contain the same mechanisms (e.g. WYSIWYG editors produced by one company).

Myth 3: An external administrator does not care that much
On the contrary. In the case of long-term services, the providers must care even more, so that the client was satisfied enough to extend the contract. That is not true that they will paste texts ignoring typing errors or automatically carry out wrong orders. They also want to be proud of the website they administer and need the best possible references.