Hello Site Point SEOers vs

Is there any point in doing a redirect from one to the other and which is best to use?

I used to be part of the no-www crew, until I tried optimizing my site for speed and needed to use cookie-less sub-domains for static components.

I think the crucial thing is to ensure one redirects the other - regardless of the one you choose.

To gain the value from (back)links you should choose www. or no www. which one doesn’t matter as long you make a choice.

Yes, there is a definite reason for doing a redirect from one to the other. If Google finds one reference to and one to, and there is no redirect, there is a strong chance that Google will see the two as separate pages, and will index them independently. This means your link juice will be split between the two, which will reduce their importance in Google’s eyes compared with if you had a single page that had all of those links pointing to it - and that’s what a redirect gives you.

As to which version of the URL you want to make the default - that’s up to you. There are good arguments for either one. For the people who like*, the argument is that including the www makes it obvious it’s a URL, and often makes it a clickable link in parsed text (eg in email, forum posting, Facebook, SMS) without the need for a clunky and ugly http://. On the other hand, the people who like (which includes me) point out that expecting people to type a completely unnecessary 4 characters and say a completely unnecessary 10 syllables in every web address is a waste of time and that it is far more efficient to use the shortest possible URL.

Of course, if you’ve done your redirects properly, it doesn’t matter if you mix and match. You can use for any situations where you don’t need it to be automagically clickable, and stick the www. on the front where it helps to do so.

The choice between the two is like the choice between six eggs and half a dozen eggs in terms of which is better.

Once you choose which one you prefer then redirect the other so that everyone ends up accessing the same one.

what? could you explain this please?

This is just a visual preference and not duplicate content. You can adjust how your website is being displayed in webmaster tools. Otherwise it is does not matter to Google at all.

I always do instead because it looks like people are starting to get lazy and not write the www.

And redirects are a must.

Choose one and make sure if you are exchanging links then use only the choosen one for your link partner to link back…

Yes when you are the one that started the thread and you say it once.

Thanks for the advice. Is it possible to say “thankyou”, without it being a fluff post?

I usually do a redirect, mainly so that Google webmaster tools treats both as the same site. Other than that, I don’t think there’s any real benefit.

If you don’t do something, Google will show results for two different pages. Not sure about other search engines, but you can use the Google webmaster tools to set your preference with their search engine.

I personally do a redirect to, but that is likely to just be a personal preference.

Actually is a sub-domain refers to people have different habit ,some type in to access a site,some prefer you’d better use both of them.

@seriocomic I’ve also just discovered serving content from a cookieless domain to speed up page load (as recommended by Google Page Speed). Now I will ALWAYS use www.

If you don’t use www cookies will be served for *, this means all applications/sites running on the domain will share cookie information creating addition cookie transfers and slowing down the page load. Using www keeps things separate.

www is a subdomain. There is no point in using a subdomain if you don’t need one. Dump www. I did. All requests for www go to the non-www using a 301 redirect.