Do we still need the www.?

[jbsegal]

Poll "www." - the appendix of the internet?

Discuss in the comments, of course. :)

Comments

[xeger]

What's the "right thing" ?

[gilana]

I almost never bother to type it in anymore, and I usually get to the right site. I'm not a moron, but I am lazy!

[ckd]

If Netscape had pushed for SRV record use (which they could have done by statically linking a resolver library into Navigator) instead of their stupid "recognize a magic hostname, and load-balance in the client" BS back in the 1990s, then sure, pointing your browser to "foo.com" would be the right thing to do.

But they were too busy inventing , and the opportunity was lost. Dumbasses. At least Jabber (and a few other things) started using SRV.

[warlord_mit]

I second this -- SRVs can (and should) be used.
But there's nothing that says that we cannot migrate to SRVs even now.

[n5red]

Since I work in .edu space, going to .com space automatically is the wrong thing.

[jbsegal]

... which wasn't the question... :)

[lakmiseiru]

I almost misread it as that myself, and had to do a couple of rereads to double check... and I'm still not sure of my own opinions on the matter :^)

[tla]

Where "people are morons" is elitist shorthand for "people behave like people, and usually not like geeks". It's best all around if functionality follows usage. If you don't like the prevailing usage it's almost always your problem and not theirs.

(Plus, if people are having to type in URLs by hand at all, you want them as short as possible.)

[dougo]

For some reason I interpreted "people are morons" as "webmasters who don't put web pages at foo.com are morons". People who don't type "www." aren't morons, they're just efficient.