While I would agree the vast majority of the time, ads are also used heavily by small businesses and independent developers to gauge interest and even just to keep the lights on sometimes. Mostly referring to online ads, billboards and TV ads are much more expensive and are far more risky for small businesses.
I don't like this argument. As if an indie shoemaker should be grateful to have the privilege to get in a bidding war against Nike for who can give Facebook more money to get noticed.
Just want to point out I think there's a big difference between using tracking to "gauge interest" and using ads. You can do one without the other. In fact, there are even privacy-respecting alternatives for businesses to track online traffic.
I tend to agree, even though the line can be blurry. I was more anti this kind of stuff until I used Google Analytics for the first time and saw how you could fiddle with just a few things on a page and decrease bounce rate or increase how long people stayed on page (reading the article, one hopes). I always assumed it'd involve more quality compromise or something but it's often just changing a headline and showing more before the fold. Seems like it benefits everyone to enable those kinds of iterations.
I haven't used these and would use Google Analytics if it were indeed just too much better than everything else out there. But if another service gives me everything Google Analytics provides and more, why continue using Google Analytics?
I wouldn't know though since I've never tried using these. I just know about them.
There is also Wide Angle Analytics, Simple Analytics, and few other options.
As you said. There is little reason to expose yourself to an extra risk.
From CNIls ruling (not a quote, but a summary):
> The CNIL ordered each website operator to comply with the GDPR—for example, by not using Google Analytics or “using a tool that does not involve a transfer outside the EU”.
