| 3:04 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
We had an e-commerce site built in ASP and the products were positioned at the top.
I donít believe there is a difference between dynamic and static pages to position high as long as you take care of other standard SEO aspects.
| 6:55 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I don't know if asp is not as good as html or if the people that build the asp pages just don't optimize as well but I do not see asp pages ranking as well as html. My experience is to always make it easy for the search engines and the search engines will reward you.
| 6:58 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
its not what you use its the way that you use it!
| 7:00 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I've found that static looking .asp pages are great but dynamic urls are somewhat sketchy.
site.com/cheap-widgets.asp <-- works great
site.com/cheap-widgets.asp?widgetid=xyz <-- lately translates to a pr of zero and doesn't pull as much traffic as the static looking page name.
That's what I see with my stuff.
| 7:07 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
My site is entirely written in ASP and 99% of my pages are generated. About 75% of my pages are indexed, but none of the dynamic URLs are granted any PR. My main pages ranges from PR6 to PR4.
I have seen lots of ASP dynamic URL with PR though. Go to any of the MSN websites, i am sure you will see some of them having PR.
As for ranking, my site ranks quite well. But I am sure I am missing out on the PR4 self-linking boost from the 5000+ dynamic pages I have.
| 7:28 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
there is NO problem using asp or parameters if you are sensible ... it has been repeated here many times including by googleguy: do not use the letters 'id' as one of the parameters.
| 7:30 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0)|
ASP, ASP with data in the querystring, and HTML are all ranked the same way. It makes no difference at all. While I don't know about that "id" thing, you'll find that the top results when searching most "tech terms" are articles or dynamic pages with long querystrings.
| 1:03 am on Jul 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I've removed id entirely from my querystrings months ago and there was zero positive impact from doing so.
| 8:28 am on Jul 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Just keep the number of variables in querystring less than 2 with no "id" combinations whatsoever, and keep them as short as possible (characters wise), google shouldn't have any problem indexing them.
I am starting to doubt the "id" combination having a negative effect on SERP. I have seen many sites that are ranked well even with "id" in their querystring.
| 6:52 pm on Jul 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Not sure, but I suspect Google likes static pages more than dynamic ones. My next site will be PHP-generated static pages (every time I add content, a static page is generated; if I need to change the content, a new page is generated).
| 7:20 pm on Jul 13, 2004 (gmt 0)|
>>HughMungus: php -> static pages. <<
Thatís exactly what I do too.
Itís easier for me to re-generate static pages directly on a server than to realize that database server was down for couple hours or so.
Sometimes, of course, this is not an option.