• 0

Business website: to www or not to www


Question

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.

15 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

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
  • 0
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...

  • 0
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.

  • 0

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.

  • 0

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)). 

  • 0

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.

  • 0
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!

 

 

  • 0

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

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Onkyo Dolby Atmos AV receivers are really solid deals by Sayan Sen Recently we covered great deals on several soundbar models from the likes of Sony, JBL, Samsung and others for really good prices (the lowest in several months). Aside from that we also reported on the Edifier S3000MKII, a hi-fi two-way bookshelf monitor that's available for only $800. Today we bring a list of AV receivers from Onkyo that are available at great prices including the Onkyo NR7100, RZ30, and 8470 (purchase links under the specs table down below). The Onkyo TX-NR7100 and Onkyo TX-RZ30 are both 9.2-channel AV receivers designed for immersive home theater setups but they occupy slightly different tiers within Onkyo’s lineup with the RZ30 positioned as the more advanced model. The TX-NR7100 is a THX Certified 9.2-channel receiver offering up to 100 W per channel (8 ohms, 2 channels driven). It supports Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, and IMAX Enhanced formats, with flexible configurations such as 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 speaker layouts. A key highlight is its built-in Dirac Live Room Correction which should help optimize sound based on your room and its acoustics. In comparison, both models share several core capabilities though the RZ30 is geared toward enthusiasts seeking more precise calibration and system flexibility, while the NR7100 is positioned as a slightly more accessible, value-focused option with strong all-round performance. The technical specs of the RZ30 and NR7100 9.2 AVRs are given in the table below: Specification Onkyo TX-RZ30 Onkyo TX-NR7100 Power Output (FTC, 2ch driven) ~100 W/ch (8Ω, 20Hz–20kHz, 0.08% THD) 100 W/ch (8Ω, 20Hz–20kHz, 0.08% THD) Dynamic / Peak Power 9 × 170 W (6Ω, 1kHz, 1% THD, 1ch driven) 220 W/ch (6Ω, 1kHz, 10% THD, 1ch driven) Frequency Response 5 Hz – 100 kHz (+1/-3 dB) 10 Hz – 100 kHz (+1/-3 dB) THD 0.08% 0.08% Room Correction Dirac Live (full bandwidth) Dirac Live (with AccuReflex support) Immersive Audio Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, IMAX Enhanced Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, IMAX Enhanced Speaker Layout Support Up to 7.2.2 / 5.2.4 / 9.2 processing Up to 7.2.4 / 5.2.4 / 9.2 processing HDMI Inputs / Outputs 6 inputs / 2 outputs (eARC) 6 inputs / 2 outputs (Main + Sub/Zone 2) HDMI 2.1 Support 8K/60, 4K/120, VRR, ALLM, QFT, DSC, eARC 8K/60, 4K/120, VRR, ALLM, QFT, DSC, eARC Video Formats HDR10+, Dolby Vision, HDCP 2.3 HDR10+, Dolby Vision, HDCP 2.3 Streaming / Network Wi-Fi, AirPlay 2, Chromecast, Bluetooth, DTS Play-Fi Wi-Fi, AirPlay 2, Chromecast, Bluetooth, DTS Play-Fi Get them at the links below: Onkyo TX-RZ30 9.2-Channel AV Receiver: $797.00 (Sold and shipped by Electronic Expo) Onkyo TX-NR7100 9.2-Channel AV Receiver: $699.00 (Sold and shipped by Adorma) Onkyo TX-8470 2 Ch Stereo Receiver: $449.00 (Sold and Shipped by Adorma) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links or authorized dealer links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from such links only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • A different thing with Russia. When you say is it better, depends on things. It is better that we don't have the E.U making rules and laws that have nothing to do with them. Is the trading part better? No, that is really mucked up, but then we knew that was going to happen and we would have make agreements, like we do with other parts of the world. Freedom of movement is certainly better, but could be improved, we still need more control over our borders. do you live in the U.K?
    • So what am I quoting from them? I never listened to what Farage or his cronies said. I wanted the U.K to leave the E.u years before the referendum and it had nothing to do with Farage and his cronies. So what country do you live in? Did we work much better together? We were always at logger heads with the E.U because we disagreed with them so much. Maggie was always on at them. I would have thought the E.U was glad to get rid of us as we stopped the integration or made it a two tier. Now without us they can integrate more. I would not have voted out if it was just a trading block and we can still work together on somethings.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      498
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      224
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      148
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!