• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

  • 0
Sign in to follow this  

Business website: to www or not to www

Question

kiddingguy    58

For a domain you can choose to have your website displayed (and keyed in) as www.xyz.com or xyz.com in the browser.

 

Who would an organization use/choose www or without the www in their domain?

What's better and more common? And what do customers usually type in? What's more recognizable etc etc.

 

I, myself, am more a pro-www, but if there are other arguments as to not use www I am more than willing to listen to these point of views.

And, of course, once chosen for a specific prefix you should hold on to it and be consistent and not use www and non-www prefixes and (re)directs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Descartes    130

It's the same kind of argument as with how to put on a toilet paper roll.

 

Like you said, be consistent, and make sure both addresses work for the end user (have one redirect to the other) and you're golden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Danielx64    603

IMO it better not to have the WWW. I redirect WWW to the main domain :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
+John.    1,395

In this day and age it's purely athestic. As long as you have the www. as a redirect for the old schoolers, then it'll be fine.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
game_over    801

I prefer the www.

 

However, it makes no difference, as you say, just choose one and make sure you stick to it. be sure to add BOTH of them in google search console and then pick your preferred site under the site settings.

 

Google see's www. and non-www as individual sites so you also need to be forcing to your chose method.

 

I prefer the www. it looks better and if someone types xyz.com you would have something in your .htaccess file to automatically redirect them to www.xyz.com.. so in theory it doesn't really matter if you have everything setup properly.

Edited by game_over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Steven P.    13,861

Well Edge decides that www isn't necessary, even if the site (like Neowin) is configured for www. :) 

 

SNAG-0004.png

 

Address bar open ^

 

SNAG-0005.png

 

Address bar closed ^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
madd-hatter    332
26 minutes ago, Descartes said:

It's the same kind of argument as with how to put on a toilet paper roll.

This caught me off guard so I had to look into it... I've never met anyone who thought installing TP in an under orientation was rational but apparently it is a common argument. Hm...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
game_over    801
3 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

Well Edge decides that www isn't necessary, even if the site (like Neowin) is configured for www. :) 

 

SNAG-0004.png

 

Address bar open ^

 

SNAG-0005.png

 

Address bar closed ^

Most do this, Safari shortens the rest of the URL ie.. /forums/... and only shows the main domain unless clicked to reveal the full url.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
pqt    275

Both work equally as well, but be sure not to actually treat them equally. Google sees

as 4 completely separate entities, so whichever one you pick (I too am pro-www) you need to be adamant that everything is sourced from that location. The others should simply 301 to the target domain. But ultimately there's no real arguments either way for what's better or not. It's purely the choice of the webmaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Ludacris1990    13

I usually have my Servers configured to have the FQDN configured as primary adress.

This is primarily because I want to keep the subs free for anything else like dev or staging (webdevelopment), promotional stuff (e.g. winzone), organisational stuff (owa, email, calendar, intranet (and yes, I usually use a valid FQDN for an active directory as you can then register proper SSL certificates for intranet pages), etc.) 

But all in all, its just a preference. Both work, the subdomain www has been associated with website (and is even used as synonym for website in some countries (poland for example)). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
svnO.o    26

I'm pro-www as well though I agree that it is completely up to your preference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Seahorsepip    610

I never understood why www as standard has been around so long, it's not as if you would use the domain without www for something else then the main website...

Main reason why I don't like it is because it's more letters to type :p 

 

Thanks for reminding me about www, I almost forgot to set a dns redirect on a site I'm working on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Circaflex    3,555

I rarely type out a full address anyways, I usually type nameofsite and then crtl+enter to finish it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
DevTech    1,517
On 8/19/2016 at 7:45 PM, Seahorsepip said:

I never understood why www as standard has been around so long, it's not as if you would use the domain without www for something else then the main website...

Main reason why I don't like it is because it's more letters to type :p 

 

Thanks for reminding me about www, I almost forgot to set a dns redirect on a site I'm working on.

It is just internet history.

 

The internet existed before HTML and web pages and all the major companies would have a domain like IBM.com where you would actually connect to it via several protocols using a terminal interface, such as ftp.ibm.com with the main top level address often defaulting to the Golpher Protocol.

 

So when the new fangled World Wide Web of interconnected HTML documents came along, the logical thing was www.ibm.com

 

It didn't take long before responsibility for corporate WWW was handed over to the marketing drones at each company who often to this day think that WWW is a technical requirement!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Anibal P    2,055

WWW is going to die off as the primary way of accessing a site

Main reason, mobile, the less you have to type on a screen the better off you are, and as people switch to only mobile and tablets with the random laptop thrown in sites that are "harder" to type in will fade into obscurity, just a matter of time, those of us using a desktop with a high res screen or more are in the minority these days

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Shiranui    1,916

What I hate are sites that only use one or the other.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.