Your achievements

Level 1

0% to

Level 2

Tip /
Sign in

Sign in to Community

to gain points, level up, and earn exciting badges like the new
BedrockMission!

Learn more

View all

Sign in to view all badges

SOLVED

Target license question: running mbox / at.js on every page even with no experiments adds to licensing cost?

analytics_union
Level 4
Level 4

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?

 

But in all of the Target implementation guides for both client-side JavaScript and also for Launch implementations, the guides just say to implement at.js in all pages.

 

Then, in Adobe's pricing webpage at https://helpx.adobe.com/legal/product-descriptions/adobe-target.html, it states that Target Standard's license is based on Annual Page View Traffic. Based on the definition of "Page View", it does sound like running at.js on every page adds to the license cost.

 

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.

 

Does anyone have any suggestions?

cost license mbox server call Target
1 Accepted Solution
mikewebguy
Correct answer by
Employee
Employee

@analytics_union 

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.

Mihnea Docea | Technical Support Consultant | Customer Experience | Adobe | 1 (800) 497-0335

View solution in original post

4 Replies
mikewebguy
Correct answer by
Employee
Employee

@analytics_union 

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.

Mihnea Docea | Technical Support Consultant | Customer Experience | Adobe | 1 (800) 497-0335

View solution in original post

Amelia_Waliany
Employee
Employee

Hi @analytics_union,

 

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!
 
Warmly,
Amelia 
analytics_union
Level 4
Level 4

Hi @Amelia_Waliany , FYI my question wasn't about upgrading from mbox.js to at.js, but about how licensing cost is done.

Amelia_Waliany
Employee
Employee

Hi @analytics_union, Yes, I can read that clearly, thank you! This invitation was shared with you because your post in the Community is *related to* the topic being covered in the webinar, not because it was meant to answer your question (we can thank @mikewebguy for that!). The invitation is simply an addition to this Discussion given the general related topic. Attendance is optional and for those who are interested; so if you’re not interested, no worries, but if so, please do join us!