An Adobe Target trainer told my client that mbox should be fired on pages where there are running experiments. This is apparently to reduce server calls, which would reduce licensing costs too. My client is using Target Standard.
Firstly, my client is already using at.js through Launch. They’re not using the old mbox.js at all. So is mbox even a thing for my client?
In Target’s interface, I see mbox referenced together with "Custom Code", e.g. when setting up a variation. So maybe it is still a thing even though they're using at.js?
So I’m not sure how to respond to my client about the trainer’s advice. I want to say that since they’re using at.js, they’re only paying for the server calls to Target from pages that have running experiments, and not from other pages where there are no experiments. But given what the pricing page says, I'm not sure if that is even correct. Yet, I feel that it's silly to limit at.js to certain pages because they could run experiments at any time on any page(s), which could mean constant toggling on/off of at.js.
at.js is the latest version of the code target_global_mbox is still a thing. I agree with the guides you should implement target on all of your pages. If there is a page without Target you won't be able to set up an activity on that page in the future. As far as I've heard there is no additional cost per server call. I believe the document you are referencing is talking about overall Annual Page View Traffic for your whole site regardless of where you implement Target. Feel free to confirm with your Account Manager.
Our next Adobe Target Skill Builder Webinar is right around the corner on May 5th, and will be presented by Adobe Target Product Management on migrating Adobe Target’s mbox.js to At.js. Check out this community discussion to register today. Hope you can make it!