Is awstats the most accurate for tracking visitors? (Becuase I do not mind it, but not sure if it is real accurate... I assume it is though but wanna make sure)
What would be even more accurate? (because I see with most other trackers they do not register the "noscript" visitors)
Exactly. Visitors who have their browser setup to not allow scripts to run will not be recorded by Google Analytics. But I still think using AwStats and Google together provide a great solution. They each have their pros and cons.
I have experienced awstats to be a complete waste of time, disk space and inaccurate... I use a combination of options... Try statcounter, google analytics, urchin, and the like... Then judge for yourself...
awstats takes a long time to load and i remember often having to send emails to get awstats showing up on the same day as it was. using server side scripts are best and fastest if you don't need details.
AWstats tracks more; every request to the server. Google tracks each page their code is on. Awstats thus tracks more, but Google provides better and more useful reports.
Thanks for the information Zhoog! So google only gets the traffic on my homepage (assuming thats only where i put it) and awstats gets traffic from all my pages? Because I need a traffic report for all my pages not just one.
I suggest implementing Google tracking code on all your pages for the best analytics. If the page displays in a browser add the tracker code to it. Also try to add the tracking code to your downloads and outbound links. In the end Google or Microsoft is the best to track visitor stats as it provides better and nicer reports. Awstats is just something you usually get for free with your hosting account. It has it's uses but in the end try to use the tracker javascript on all your pages!