smayler
msg:378908 | 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 don’t believe there is a difference between dynamic and static pages to position high as long as you take care of other standard SEO aspects.
|
goodroi
msg:378909 | 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.
|
topr8
msg:378910 | 6:58 pm on Jul 12, 2004 (gmt 0) |
its not what you use its the way that you use it!
|
Easy_Coder
msg:378911 | 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.
|
Raymond
msg:378912 | 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.
|
topr8
msg:378913 | 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.
|
digitalv
msg:378914 | 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.
|
Easy_Coder
msg:378915 | 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.
|
Raymond
msg:378916 | 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.
|
HughMungus
msg:378917 | 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).
|
smayler
msg:378918 | 7:20 pm on Jul 13, 2004 (gmt 0) |
>>HughMungus: php -> static pages. << That’s exactly what I do too. It’s 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.
|
|
