homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.145.183.169
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Domain Names
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: buckworks & webwork

Domain Names Forum

    
With "www" or without "www" better?
PowerUp

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 6:40 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)

Some domains are www.domainname.com while others are domainname.com.
What are the pros and cons of each? Thank you.

 

Webwork

WebmasterWorld Administrator webwork us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 9:10 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)

I prefer to register my domains without paying the extra for the optional www., though sometimes I do purchase the ".". :P

Okay, all kidding aside, what I've been reading lately has tended to favor using the www.Example.com version and redirecting Example.com to the www. version.

It's somewhat of an epic battle - www. vs. Example.com - but at least according to Jane and Robot (Vanessa Fox) it looks like robot is happy with www. right now.

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 10:40 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)

I prefer to register my domains without paying the extra for the optional www., though sometimes I do purchase the ".". :P

Let me clean me screen! I was wondering why my renewal fees are so high. It's because of both versions, that never dawned on me. :)

www.Example.com version and redirecting Example.com to the www. version.

Yup, that still seems to be the suggestion on this side of the pond. And one that I'd stick with.

Head over to the social media side and they've dropped their pants (www). In fact, they don't care much about canonicalization. Nor do they care about http vs https.

jdMorgan

WebmasterWorld Senior Member jdmorgan us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 12:30 am on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)

To be clear with all the joking in this thread: "example.com" is a domain. "www.example.com" and "forums.example.com" are both subdomains of "example.com".

The "www" subdomain was originally added to domains to differentiate the "private network" and the "public web site." The domain would often resolve to different content than the subdomain, and although both can "be the same site," there is no requirement that they are.

If the OP is actually being charged extra by a registrar for a subdomain, then that bears some investigation as it is dishonest at best, and likely criminal fraud.

Jim

HuskyPup



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:56 am on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)

I read an interview quite awhile ago from Tim Berners-Lee saying about "Would you have done anything differently" and his response was akin to "My biggest mistake was using the www"!

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:58 am on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)

"My biggest mistake was using the www"!

I'd have to agree with that sentiment. But, it may be too late. That www. is ingrained in the general and Webmaster public alike. And, with over 55 trillion links on the Internet (as of 2007 December), I'll keep me www and just 301 non www to www. And, I can promote either one, doesn't matter. :)

gpmgroup

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:33 pm on Aug 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

"My biggest mistake was using the www"!

That assumes that the "www" webpage will always be the dominant use. That may not always be the case. So its good to use the www now and leave your options open in the future.

For marketing you can always brand and redirect the current most used use to the full syntax.


pinterface

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 9:14 pm on Aug 5, 2008 (gmt 0)

Using a subdomain gives a little more flexibility when setting up DNS, but otherwise it doesn't really matter--the important thing is to pick one and make sure the other redirects there.

On my personal website, I redirect both example.com and www.example.com to web.example.com. 'web' is much easier to say than 'double-u double-u double-u'. ;)

g1smd

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 10:03 pm on Aug 7, 2008 (gmt 0)

Let one serve content and redirect the other. Then it doesn't matter which one they type in, the content can still be reached.

I prefer using www because then the search site:domain.com -inurl:www is useful to check that no other variations have been indexed.

khucthuydu

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:17 am on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

I prefer using "no www" because short :D

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:20 am on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

I'm now using non www in communications due to 140 SMS character limits and it is becoming somewhat of a habit. Of course I 301 to the www for now. When the tide shifts, I'll be one of the last crabs to follow. :)

Actually I have a new launch coming up and I'm stripping the www. It is all audience based. If you expect a balance of links with and without, I'd go without now that I've seen the "other side" of things. That www is a hindrance when working with character limitations. :)

Quadrille

WebmasterWorld Senior Member quadrille us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:52 am on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

I go with convention, and use www - but I get really narked when subdomains are listed as www.subdomain.example.com

technically, I get told, www. IS a subdomain, so other subdomains are instead, not as well!

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 2:08 am on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

I go with convention, and use www

You know, I've supported that same mantra for years. I'm starting to see things a little differently now, from various marketing angles. There is a movement on the web towards micro-blogging and that www is three characters you can do without. That means that your inbounds are going to be minus the www. At some point, you really have to look hard at your audience and cater to their needs and that of your marketing. I have Twitism and that www is a challenge if things are not set up properly at the destination.

But I get really narked when subdomains are listed as www.subdomain.example.com

Also, now that I've been surfing more with my PDA for testing, that www is surely a pain in the arse, it really is. I'm fortunate in that most of the destinations I visit have their ducks in a row. :)

Arrrggghhh! I'm with ya' there, what a mess that can create if someone or something, like a bot, finds it by mistake. I don't think it is too common of a find but when they exist, be prepared. :(

g1smd

WebmasterWorld Senior Member g1smd us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 6:50 pm on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

I'll often use the non-www in communication, but when they click it, they'll be redirected to the www version.

Kate82

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 7:17 pm on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

personally I never enter www. but in my sites I always do www. and redirect non-www. :)

pageoneresults

WebmasterWorld Senior Member pageoneresults us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 7:34 pm on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

personally I never enter www. but in my sites I always do www. and redirect non-www.

I see that response quite a bit more frequently these days as us Baby Boomers move over and the next gen comes in. :)

I'm hoping that the discussion of 301 Redirects in this instance are something of the past and that everyone has their things in order. Yes?

gpmgroup

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 11:05 pm on Aug 8, 2008 (gmt 0)

I prefer to register my domains without paying the extra for the optional www., though sometimes I do purchase the ".". :P

I saw my first shop sign with only 2 w's today ww.thisorthatshop.co.uk There I was thinking they were short of space I didn't realise they were saving money :)

Quadrille

WebmasterWorld Senior Member quadrille us a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 1:53 am on Aug 9, 2008 (gmt 0)

Not really; with most registrars, it's "Buy two - get one Free"

So once they've paid for two, might as well go the whole hog!

:)

cfx211

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 7:02 pm on Aug 9, 2008 (gmt 0)

I tend towards example.com and leave the www off. Dropping those 4 characters gives you a few more characters to play with in short ads, and I feel like I am doing my small part towards getting rid of www on the internets.

dailypress

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 3713351 posted 10:29 am on Aug 15, 2008 (gmt 0)

lets see what Google does! w/ www or w/o www

I personally have used both methods on different websites and prefer using www.

I have also realized some of my visitors are refered doing Google searches i.e.:

www keyword

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / WebmasterWorld / Domain Names
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved