Comments for www. is not deprecated http://www.yes-www.org really Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:48:10 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0-alpha hourly 1 Comment on www. is not deprecated by kersurk http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-2/#comment-1213 kersurk Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:48:10 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1213 Hi, http protocol IS www, so www is just a leftover, so no-www.org ftw! Hi,
http protocol IS www, so www is just a leftover, so no-www.org ftw!

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Lucas http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-2/#comment-1209 Lucas Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:17:48 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1209 I'm tired or people who argue that typing URI into the search engine is wrong! I do it for sites I have never been to for this reasons: typo, I can barely spell in any language and I don't want to land in a phishing site. Google will rank first the correct domain for sure, even if I made a mistake. I do it for a prophylactic purpose, so should you. With the sites I have regularly encounters with, I don't, I just use the bookmarks ;) NOTE: Also, you can check if the site has been flagged if you have McAfee Site Advisor. I’m tired or people who argue that typing URI into the search engine is wrong! I do it for sites I have never been to for this reasons: typo, I can barely spell in any language and I don’t want to land in a phishing site. Google will rank first the correct domain for sure, even if I made a mistake. I do it for a prophylactic purpose, so should you. With the sites I have regularly encounters with, I don’t, I just use the bookmarks ;)
NOTE: Also, you can check if the site has been flagged if you have McAfee Site Advisor.

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Chris http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1200 Chris Mon, 14 Dec 2009 01:20:54 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1200 I prefer the non-www. I don't like seeing duplicate entries in the SERP with www and non-www links to the same page. I do use a 301 redirect for all www to go to non-www on all my domains. I'm hoping this will help clean up the duplicate entries in the search engines the next time the spiders come to my websites. I prefer the non-www. I don’t like seeing duplicate entries in the SERP with www and non-www links to the same page. I do use a 301 redirect for all www to go to non-www on all my domains. I’m hoping this will help clean up the duplicate entries in the search engines the next time the spiders come to my websites.

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Richard Joh http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1199 Richard Joh Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:23:42 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1199 Protocol understanding fail. Protocol understanding fail.

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Eric http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1197 Eric Fri, 27 Nov 2009 02:33:38 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1197 I believe in yes-www, but seriously, a gentle reminder? www misleads to world wide web... To remind people there are other protocols, shouldn't it be http://http.example.com/. I use www since I use subdomains. If I had a site without any subdomains, then I would go no-www. I think it is useful since I have gs1.example.com, forum.example.com, svn.example.com, etc... I just think that www.example.com while meshed in there is a lot cleaner than just example.com I believe in yes-www, but seriously, a gentle reminder?
www misleads to world wide web…
To remind people there are other protocols, shouldn’t it be http://http.example.com/.

I use www since I use subdomains. If I had a site without any subdomains, then I would go no-www. I think it is useful since I have gs1.example.com, forum.example.com, svn.example.com, etc… I just think that http://www.example.com while meshed in there is a lot cleaner than just example.com

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Kevin Jennings http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1196 Kevin Jennings Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:32:01 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1196 As the General Manager of Search Engine Optimization company, this issue is a real one. Having duplicate content on both http://www.example.com and http://example.com is a horror for the commercial value of the site. You end up with competing sites in the search engines. To maximize ranking you need to choose either http://www.example.com or http://example.com as the target of you link building. Consequently, a webmaster needs to decide, www. or not www. Given any history of a site, choosing NOT www. is usually a major mistake. If you get natural links, the ones the search engines want you to have, most will be www. today so even for a new site it is a better choice. Next you need to redirect to one version of your site. Choosing both options is just stupid for any commercial site or any site that wants people to visit the site. Of course if you do not want people to visit your site, the site should not exist as it does not serve anyone other than perhaps some stupid algorithm developed by Google to promote adwords and increase barriers to entry to competitors. As the General Manager of Search Engine Optimization company, this issue is a real one. Having duplicate content on both http://www.example.com and http://example.com is a horror for the commercial value of the site. You end up with competing sites in the search engines. To maximize ranking you need to choose either http://www.example.com or http://example.com as the target of you link building. Consequently, a webmaster needs to decide, www. or not www.

Given any history of a site, choosing NOT www. is usually a major mistake. If you get natural links, the ones the search engines want you to have, most will be www. today so even for a new site it is a better choice. Next you need to redirect to one version of your site. Choosing both options is just stupid for any commercial site or any site that wants people to visit the site. Of course if you do not want people to visit your site, the site should not exist as it does not serve anyone other than perhaps some stupid algorithm developed by Google to promote adwords and increase barriers to entry to competitors.

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Dave http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1192 Dave Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:03:47 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1192 Here's my take on this whole business: http://www.bigfatdave.com/to_www_or_not_to_www.html If you'd like to have some fun, try doing this: http://bigfatdave.com/ or this: http://bigfatdave.com/blog.php BTW - IO Error: in case you're wondering where all your visitors have gone, they're all seeing server not found errors, because you've got a DNS error. Peace, - Dave Here’s my take on this whole business:
http://www.bigfatdave.com/to_www_or_not_to_www.html
If you’d like to have some fun, try doing this:
http://bigfatdave.com/
or this:
http://bigfatdave.com/blog.php

BTW – IO Error: in case you’re wondering where all your visitors have
gone, they’re all seeing server not found errors, because you’ve got a
DNS error.

Peace,
– Dave

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by Sorceror http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1189 Sorceror Tue, 16 Sep 2008 23:19:26 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1189 I see a lot of people complaining that ftp://example.com and http://example.com would have to be hosted on the same physical machine. My modem has at least 9 different computers connected to it via ethernet switches and wireless routers. Obviously, all traffic directed to my modem's IP gets routed to all boxes on the LAN, right? Wrong. There are mechanisms in place in TCP/IP and ethernet protocols to avoid this. What about serving? The magical solution to the one-IP-many-serving-boxes problem is called NAT. Even with a residential-class modem, I've been able to direct access from port A to local IP X, and port B to local IP Y. So I could have http://example.com and ftp://example.com sharing the same WAN IP but being physically different boxes with different LAN IPs. And in fact, that is what I do. And it works. What you wouldn't be able to do with NAT is separate http://example.com from ftp://example.com:80, but I think most people will agree using the HTTP port for FTP is silly :) I see a lot of people complaining that ftp://example.com and http://example.com would have to be hosted on the same physical machine.

My modem has at least 9 different computers connected to it via ethernet switches and wireless routers. Obviously, all traffic directed to my modem’s IP gets routed to all boxes on the LAN, right? Wrong. There are mechanisms in place in TCP/IP and ethernet protocols to avoid this.

What about serving? The magical solution to the one-IP-many-serving-boxes problem is called NAT. Even with a residential-class modem, I’ve been able to direct access from port A to local IP X, and port B to local IP Y. So I could have http://example.com and ftp://example.com sharing the same WAN IP but being physically different boxes with different LAN IPs. And in fact, that is what I do. And it works.

What you wouldn’t be able to do with NAT is separate http://example.com from ftp://example.com:80, but I think most people will agree using the HTTP port for FTP is silly :)

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by qhutz http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1186 qhutz Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:34:03 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1186 while I disagree with you about the www. being preferred, I am completely agree that both www.example.com and example.com should resolve to the intended page, and that it should redirect to one or the other, making the page's url unique. while I disagree with you about the www. being preferred, I am completely agree that both http://www.example.com and example.com should resolve to the intended page, and that it should redirect to one or the other, making the page’s url unique.

]]> Comment on www. is not deprecated by www.www.extra-www.org — omglog http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/comment-page-1/#comment-1182 www.www.extra-www.org — omglog Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:01:08 +0000 http://www.yes-www.org/www-is-not-deprecated/#comment-1182 [...] is presumably parody aimed at the two sídes of the anti-www/pro-www [...] [...] is presumably parody aimed at the two sídes of the anti-www/pro-www [...]

]]>