|Smart Phone User Agent is this cloaking?|
Smart Phone User Agent
| 4:17 am on Jan 26, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Hello, this is my very first post :-D
I'm a web developer from Japan.
I am creating a website and for a mobile page as well
and recently start to creating a website for smartphone.
So I made a user-agent detection for smart phone.
Does google consider this detection as "cloaking"?
I hope not. I need an advise. Please help me out.
$ua = $_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT'];
|| (ereg("Android", $ua))
|| (ereg("Windows Phone", $ua))
|| (ereg("BlackBerry", $ua))
$flg = 's';
|| (ereg("SoftBank", $ua))
|| (ereg("Vodafone", $ua))
|| (ereg("J-PHONE", $ua))
|| (ereg("UP.Browser", $ua))
|| (ereg("KDDI", $ua))
|| (ereg("WILLCOM", $ua))
|| (ereg("DDIPOCKET", $ua))
|| (ereg("PDXGW", $ua))
|| (ereg("Googlebot-Mobile", $ua))
|| (ereg("Y!J", $ua))
|| (ereg("LD_mobile_bot", $ua))
|| (ereg("moba-crawler", $ua))
|| (ereg("RFCrawler-Mobile", $ua))
|| (ereg("froute.jp", $ua))
|| (ereg("ichiro", $ua))
$flg = 'm';
$flg = 'p';
| 4:00 am on Jan 28, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Not sure if anybody has responded to your request?
Welcome to Webmaster World.
I've personally no clue whether the lines you've provided are PHP or something else.
"cloaking" is a controversial topic and requires delicacy to insure that SE's will be able to interpret your intentions as serving "focused content to specific users", as opposed to "cloaking with the intent to deceive either the visitors or the SE's".
The SE's do their own "cloaking" (even though that's not an accurate description, it amounts to the same thing) to serve content based on browser, region and even other crieteria's.
From a webmaster's point-of-view, if the SE's allow themselves to divert traffic more efficiently (with the visitor in mind), why shouldn't the webmaster be allowed the same tool?
| 5:56 am on Jan 28, 2011 (gmt 0)|
oh thank you so much :-D
nobody actually responded to my question
oh yes this is PHP code and yes,
I should've posted like "focused content to specific users" to your other topic. i agreed. Asking about "cloaking" directly is not appropriate question so I may need to re-post and to ask for other topic :-D
Thank you, anyways
| 6:08 am on Jan 28, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Asking about cloaking is acceptable.
Many of the participants here are utilizing "white-listing", would could be described as a form or cloaking.
As long as the task is accomplished in a manner which is not intended to deceive the SE's, as well as in manner which is clearly recognizable (your intent) to the SE's, there's hardly anything wrong.
I'd just suggest to refrain from using the word "cloaking", which implies deception.
| 6:16 am on Jan 28, 2011 (gmt 0)|
"custom content" or "browser dependent content" might be a more acceptable term ;)
| 10:32 am on Mar 14, 2011 (gmt 0)|
No you should be fine as long as their mobile bot get the mobile version and the regular bot gets the regular version, so they get the same content a visitor gets. It's what wilderness said 'browser dependent' content. Cloaking is more content 'switching' for GoogleBot specifically.
For instance if you show your visitors: Welcome to Example.Com, but to GoogleBot you show Welcome to WebmasterWorld, because you want to rank for WebmasterWorld instead of what's on your website that would be cloaking.
One note about your PHP: ereg() is depricated, it's better to use preg_match. ;)
Finally: Welcome to WebmasterWorld!