3 ms·

What exactly is the usability improvement from hiding part of the domain name? Maybe we should be hiding ".com" because that's trivial too? Better yet, why show

What exactly is the usability improvement from hiding part of the domain name? Maybe we should be hiding ".com" because that's trivial too? Better yet, why show "google" at all if from the page it's clear you're on Google? Might as well just fullscreen the content pane and be done with it.

abalone 8y ago
> What exactly is the usability improvement from hiding part of the domain name? Quite simply the www subdomain is confusing and unnecessary. See comment from the ISP admin I cited re: user training. > Maybe we should be hiding ".com" because that's trivial too? Better yet, why show "google" at all if from the page it's clear you're on Google? Those aren't really serious counterexamples. ".com" is obviously not trivial; there are plenty of TLD variants in use. It is approximately 0.0000000001% as common to run separate HTTP servers on example.com and www.example.com. And clearly different domains can spoof one another's content so that's not a way to be "clear" you're on google.com, whereas this is not generally an issue with subdomains. Again your reaction is just sort of knee-jerk exaggerated resistance to change, not actual real world problem cases.
- wwweston 8y ago
  > Quite simply the www subdomain is confusing and unnecessary. Sometimes it's unnecessary. How is it confusing? Millions of non-sophisticated users became sophisticated users typing it, millions more type it every day. It doesn't seem prima facie more confusing than a pronoun or other oft-repeated article. Consider the beginning of my last sentence in this paragraph -- would you consider the "It" confusing, even though it's not strictly necessary? > Again your reaction is just sort of knee-jerk exaggerated resistance to change Perhaps your reaction is knee-jerk teleology of change as progress? As a suggestion: maybe spend less time characterizing the approach of people that you disagree with on this topic, and more time articulating actual arguments ("the www subdomain is confusing and unnecessary" counts, even though it's arguably not particularly strong), unless you'd eventually prefer it when people make the discussion partly about the shortcomings of your approach, which are far more glaring than you've clearly spent time considering.
baby 8y ago
What is the usability improvement of www?
- talaketu 8y ago
  WWW was absolutely revolutionary.
- parliament32 8y ago
  That example.com and www.example.com can go to different places? Why would you want to force anyone to run web traffic on their bare domain? mail goes to mail.example.com voip goes to voip.example.com vpn goes to vpn.example.com Why should www be any different?

abalone 8y ago

> What exactly is the usability improvement from hiding part of the domain name? Quite simply the www subdomain is confusing and unnecessary. See comment from the ISP admin I cited re: user training. > Maybe we should be hiding ".com" because that's trivial too? Better yet, why show "google" at all if from the page it's clear you're on Google? Those aren't really serious counterexamples. ".com" is obviously not trivial; there are plenty of TLD variants in use. It is approximately 0.0000000001% as common to run separate HTTP servers on example.com and www.example.com. And clearly different domains can spoof one another's content so that's not a way to be "clear" you're on google.com, whereas this is not generally an issue with subdomains. Again your reaction is just sort of knee-jerk exaggerated resistance to change, not actual real world problem cases.

wwweston 8y ago
> Quite simply the www subdomain is confusing and unnecessary. Sometimes it's unnecessary. How is it confusing? Millions of non-sophisticated users became sophisticated users typing it, millions more type it every day. It doesn't seem prima facie more confusing than a pronoun or other oft-repeated article. Consider the beginning of my last sentence in this paragraph -- would you consider the "It" confusing, even though it's not strictly necessary? > Again your reaction is just sort of knee-jerk exaggerated resistance to change Perhaps your reaction is knee-jerk teleology of change as progress? As a suggestion: maybe spend less time characterizing the approach of people that you disagree with on this topic, and more time articulating actual arguments ("the www subdomain is confusing and unnecessary" counts, even though it's arguably not particularly strong), unless you'd eventually prefer it when people make the discussion partly about the shortcomings of your approach, which are far more glaring than you've clearly spent time considering.

baby 8y ago

What is the usability improvement of www?

talaketu 8y ago
WWW was absolutely revolutionary.
parliament32 8y ago
That example.com and www.example.com can go to different places? Why would you want to force anyone to run web traffic on their bare domain? mail goes to mail.example.com voip goes to voip.example.com vpn goes to vpn.example.com Why should www be any different?