Why http:// and not http://www.?

Man that is really bad news, I have spent 19 years to get almost 2 meters. :p

No but serious, I used without www. before but started to use only www. on my domains since somehow I think it looks better.
 
In old days www was required to be used. Now it is not a requirement anymore and possibly in long run www maybe deprecated. That's why any new site should choose not to use www within their urls.
 
Use on your own site what you want, personally I think without www. is nice on short urls.
 
Not forgetting what Tim Berners Lee said recently he regretted using http:// saying he could have come up with something better.

Latest Dev version of chrome does a good job of hidding the http:// prefix from the address bar... it makes the address bar look much nicer when you just see xenforo.com and NOTHING else :D
 
I'm not using www on any sites (around 200 and for 10 years now without www...the last time I used it before vB 1.x).

Even in the past I didn't understood the reason of this subdomain of course I'm not talking about the gopher:// ages.
www is for those who can't deal with dns and servers
 
Is a matter of preference. I use the www, like many other popular sites (google, microsoft, apple, ebay, facebook, etc.). They all redirect you to www extension.
 
Wait, short is sexy now? :(
I'm a short person. :cool:

Nah, kidding (no seriously, I am kind of a short person). On topic personally, although www. is no longer required a lot of people still think it is and to be honest I do prefer people to access my web site via www. rather than without simply because without it, my web site URL looks crippled; if you know what I mean. ;)

EDIT: I agree with Erik's post, that's what I tried to explain when I said "my web site URL looks crippled". ;)
 
Top Bottom