RewriteRule ^(.*) http://how-to-box.com/boxing/$1 [R=301,L]

RewriteRule ^(.*) http://how-to-box.com/boxing/$1 [R=301,L]

and of course you need to use that plugin you mentioned, even if it doesnt make any change to your pagerank..

and of course you need to use that plugin you mentioned, even if it doesnt make any change to your pagerank..

I wen the .htaccess route which was simple enough.

I wen the .htaccess route which was simple enough.

Also, if you need to change the .htaccess file and you don’t know what you are doing you are better off contacting your web hosting provider. I know mine has been great to accommodate minor changes because it prevents them having to clean up a bigger mess later not to mention down time for your site.

Also, if you need to change the .htaccess file and you don’t know what you are doing you are better off contacting your web hosting provider. I know mine has been great to accommodate minor changes because it prevents them having to clean up a bigger mess later not to mention down time for your site.

The no www crowd can be pleased that their URL will take up less space on business cards and the rest of their collateral, which can be important.

As long as the redirect is in place, it does not matter whether the visitor types in the www or not, they will still go to the web site address that you specify in the redirect. So, there is little need for the discussion about how much typing you are saving your visitors by choosing non www.

It has more to do with what the visitor sees in the URL window of the browser.

As Jordan mentioned above, the point about Google (and other SEs)needing to be told which URL to index is an important point.

When you don’t redirect:
If most of your inbound links have www and Google chooses the non www to index, you just lost the value those links.

When you redirect, you get them back. Time to celebrate.

You may also choose to reverse your redirect in the future. Never tried this, but don’t anticipate a problem. Anyone every done this?

The no www crowd can be pleased that their URL will take up less space on business cards and the rest of their collateral, which can be important.

As long as the redirect is in place, it does not matter whether the visitor types in the www or not, they will still go to the web site address that you specify in the redirect. So, there is little need for the discussion about how much typing you are saving your visitors by choosing non www.

It has more to do with what the visitor sees in the URL window of the browser.

As Jordan mentioned above, the point about Google (and other SEs)needing to be told which URL to index is an important point.

When you don’t redirect:
If most of your inbound links have www and Google chooses the non www to index, you just lost the value those links.

When you redirect, you get them back. Time to celebrate.

You may also choose to reverse your redirect in the future. Never tried this, but don’t anticipate a problem. Anyone every done this?

Thanks for this post, this is definately something I am going to look into now.

Thanks for this post, this is definately something I am going to look into now.

For example without the URL a specific page on your site may have 1 inbound link, but with www. that page could have 100 links and therefore be much more deserving of being the chosen URL.

Both URL’s will not rank for the same term, so its essential that prevenative measures are put in place.

With or without http://www., it really does’nt matter, i personally often opt for with, but there is no benefit or disadvantage in doing so.

I recently wrote a post on how to avoid URL canonicalisation, your readers may be interested in it.

For example without the URL a specific page on your site may have 1 inbound link, but with www. that page could have 100 links and therefore be much more deserving of being the chosen URL.

Both URL’s will not rank for the same term, so its essential that prevenative measures are put in place.

With or without http://www., it really does’nt matter, i personally often opt for with, but there is no benefit or disadvantage in doing so.

I recently wrote a post on how to avoid URL canonicalisation, your readers may be interested in it.