| 2:30 pm on Mar 1, 2013 (gmt 0)|
The www version is already a sub domain. It is purely a matter of custom and practice that hits on the www subdomain and hits on the domain itself go to the same location.
| 2:34 pm on Mar 1, 2013 (gmt 0)|
not true, many sites use www.example.example.com
and in any case there is no correct way to do it, as piatkow has mentioned it is convention that example.com resolves to the subdomain www.example.com however this is not a rule and it is not always the case.
| 12:58 pm on May 27, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Well i dont see a point of using www. prefix on Your domains, its not important at all
| 12:31 pm on May 29, 2013 (gmt 0)|
Time Berners-Lee actually admitted that the www prefix was unnecessary and he only did it because it looked "cool", or something like that, and wished he had never done it.
| 12:40 pm on May 29, 2013 (gmt 0)|
It helps people 'see' a web address especially in old media, new gtLDs will need a resurgence :)
| 4:04 pm on May 29, 2013 (gmt 0)|
|Well i dont see a point of using www. prefix on Your domains, its not important at all |
It does have it's uses. Some cPanels used to use example.com as the mail domain and then use "www" for the website. One of the largest ISPs in Australia used to do this, managed from a home-grown cPanel.
Users couldn't access the site using example.com, but they could use www.example.com.
| 7:19 pm on May 29, 2013 (gmt 0)|
If you've got software that auto-links, it may look for either of "begins with http" or "begins with www".
| 1:48 am on May 30, 2013 (gmt 0)|
I've said it before...www. is redundant [webmasterworld.com] and unnecessary, but if you're going to use it, do it correctly.