SEO perspectives on having no WWW subdomain. - GoFuckYourself.com

Socks · 06-21-2009, 11:59 PM

It is pretty useless.. Are there any negatives to dropping the www on a newly launched site?

The only thing I can think of is that people will still make links to www.domain.com/whatever not realizing you don't use it. While they'll get redirected just fine, is that an issue with the search engines? Do those links "count" just as much?

Anything else to be concerned about?

qxm · 06-22-2009, 12:12 AM

when it comes to url canonicalization u might wanna read up on this:

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-ad...onicalization/

Yes, I know it is mattcuts but still a good 5 min read on this topic wouldn't hurt .. would it?!

papill0n · 06-22-2009, 12:19 AM

for someone who is claiming it is 'pretty useless' you sure don't seem very certain Socks

emthree · 06-22-2009, 12:23 AM

.htaccess will fix those issues.

RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www\.domain.com
rewriterule (.*) http://www.domain.com/$1 [R=permanent,L]

JJdotAM · 06-22-2009, 10:07 AM

I've heard anecdotally search engines prefer www but I can't bring myself to add useless characters

d-null · 06-22-2009, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJdotAM

I've heard anecdotally search engines prefer www but I can't bring myself to add useless characters

SCORE Ralph · 06-22-2009, 11:25 AM

Either one is fine as long as both are not available. Follow emthree's advice regarding the redirect to use either www. or non-www. strictly.

Socks · 06-22-2009, 12:13 PM

I meant useless being that the www is redundant, and has no effective use.. It's just like a filler subdomain that we've all been accustomed to.

So to be clear:

if we start a new site fresh with no www, and we have a page like domain.com/jenny/ and all our links point to that, however, someone with a blog references that and writes their link to http://www.domain.com/jenny/ (and the user gets redirected to the non-www) does that link carry just as much weight, even though they're not technically linking to the proper URL?

96ukssob · 06-22-2009, 12:18 PM

years ago when i worked at an SEO/SEM agency, one of the "head" SEO guys said that www implied "World Wide Web" while the non www was implied for "local" networks, such as an office, etc., were only a limited amount of people were supposed to have access. so his push was always use www when possible.

maybe it was true back in 2003, but who knows.

dready · 06-22-2009, 12:20 PM

WWW is a pain, but it's the correct way to do things. Not sure about SEO, but it's good to maintain internet standards.

woj · 06-22-2009, 12:23 PM

Everyone else uses www why are you trying to be different?

rowan · 06-22-2009, 12:28 PM

www designates that host as a web server, just like ftp is an ftp server, mail is a mail server........

Tempest · 06-22-2009, 12:28 PM

I have sites where I've done both and IMO the serach engines prefer that your site has the www . The reason? Probably because "legit" sites have it and so it makes your site appear more legit. I wouldn't be surprised if the SEs give you a slight over optimization penalty for not using it.

Tempest · 06-22-2009, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowan

www designates that host as a web server, just like ftp is an ftp server, mail is a mail server........

Really? LOL. I thought that's what the http did.

baddog · 06-22-2009, 12:34 PM

As far as SEO is concerned, just be consistent. Either use it or don't.

SCORE Ralph · 06-22-2009, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Socks

if we start a new site fresh with no www, and we have a page like domain.com/jenny/ and all our links point to that, however, someone with a blog references that and writes their link to http://www.domain.com/jenny/ (and the user gets redirected to the non-www) does that link carry just as much weight, even though they're not technically linking to the proper URL?

If you're rewriting the URL, yes it will have the same weight and will be clear to SEs what the proper URL is (whether its www. or non-www. or usethis.domain). If you dont rewrite, SEs will see 2 URLs.

06-21-2009, 11:59 PM	#1
Socks Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: Toronto Posts: 8,475	SEO perspectives on having no WWW subdomain. It is pretty useless.. Are there any negatives to dropping the www on a newly launched site? The only thing I can think of is that people will still make links to www.domain.com/whatever not realizing you don't use it. While they'll get redirected just fine, is that an issue with the search engines? Do those links "count" just as much? Anything else to be concerned about?

06-22-2009, 12:12 AM	#2
qxm Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: NoHo Posts: 5,970	when it comes to url canonicalization u might wanna read up on this: http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-ad...onicalization/ Yes, I know it is mattcuts but still a good 5 min read on this topic wouldn't hurt .. would it?! __________________ ICQ: 266990876

06-22-2009, 12:23 AM	#4
emthree Dialer Kingpin Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New York Posts: 10,816	.htaccess will fix those issues. RewriteEngine on RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www\.domain.com rewriterule (.*) http://www.domain.com/$1 [R=permanent,L] __________________ • Sell Patches & Pills •

06-22-2009, 11:25 AM	#7
SCORE Ralph Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 2,090	Either one is fine as long as both are not available. Follow emthree's advice regarding the redirect to use either www. or non-www. strictly. __________________ GetSCORECash.com \| In the Biz Since 1991 Big Tits \| Granny & MILFs \| Amateurs \| Big Booty \| Foot Fetish \| BBW \| Teens Hosted Embeds \| MP4s \| RSS Feeds \| FHGs \| Model Directory

06-22-2009, 12:18 PM	#9
96ukssob So Fucking Banananananas Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: If I was in your ass you'd know it Posts: 12,991	years ago when i worked at an SEO/SEM agency, one of the "head" SEO guys said that www implied "World Wide Web" while the non www was implied for "local" networks, such as an office, etc., were only a limited amount of people were supposed to have access. so his push was always use www when possible. maybe it was true back in 2003, but who knows. __________________ Email: Clicky on Me

06-22-2009, 12:19 AM	#3
papill0n Unregistered Abuser Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 15,547	for someone who is claiming it is 'pretty useless' you sure don't seem very certain Socks

06-22-2009, 10:07 AM	#5
JJdotAM Registered User Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 25	I've heard anecdotally search engines prefer www but I can't bring myself to add useless characters

06-22-2009, 12:13 PM	#8
Socks Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2002 Location: Toronto Posts: 8,475	I meant useless being that the www is redundant, and has no effective use.. It's just like a filler subdomain that we've all been accustomed to. So to be clear: if we start a new site fresh with no www, and we have a page like domain.com/jenny/ and all our links point to that, however, someone with a blog references that and writes their link to http://www.domain.com/jenny/ (and the user gets redirected to the non-www) does that link carry just as much weight, even though they're not technically linking to the proper URL?

06-22-2009, 12:20 PM	#10
dready Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 5,247	WWW is a pain, but it's the correct way to do things. Not sure about SEO, but it's good to maintain internet standards. __________________ ICQ: 91139591

06-22-2009, 12:23 PM	#11
woj <&(©¿©)&> Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 47,882	Everyone else uses www why are you trying to be different? __________________ Custom Software Development, email: woj#at#wojfun#.#com to discuss details or skype: wojl2000 or gchat: wojfun or telegram: wojl2000 Affiliate program tools: Hosted Galleries Manager Banner Manager Video Manager Wordpress Affiliate Plugin Pic/Movie of the Day Fansign Generator Zip Manager

06-22-2009, 12:28 PM	#12
rowan Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 17,393	www designates that host as a web server, just like ftp is an ftp server, mail is a mail server........

06-22-2009, 12:28 PM	#13
Tempest Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2004 Location: West Coast, Canada. Posts: 10,217	I have sites where I've done both and IMO the serach engines prefer that your site has the www . The reason? Probably because "legit" sites have it and so it makes your site appear more legit. I wouldn't be surprised if the SEs give you a slight over optimization penalty for not using it.

06-22-2009, 12:34 PM	#15
baddog So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: the beach, SoCal Posts: 107,089	As far as SEO is concerned, just be consistent. Either use it or don't.