Google - Latest word on dynamic vs. static URLs

Is it true .. ?

 

This is a great article, thanks for sharing it.

 

No. He obviously didn't read the article in the first post.

 

Thanks for the info, also the duplicated content one. I learn a lot

 

Rewriting URLs is also necessary in order not to expose your variables. The URL is part of your site's code! You wouldn't let people fiddle with your source code! So they shouldn't be given pointers to the variables you are using either.

 

This post has clarified many things. Thanks for posting it here.

 

I still have doubt about this. I personally feel the advantages of using mod_rewrite in terms of better rankings and faster index.
How about wikipedia? They're using static-looking urls.
How about blogspot? This article is from
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/09/dynamic-urls-vs-static-urls.html
isn't that static-looking URLs?

Perhaps Google is now trying to improve their crawlers' ability to understand dynamic url structure.
IMO, it's still too early to say dynamic urls is better than static urls.

 

I seen spammers are making this really quality post abusive, i checked the comments and its so horrible, actually they are jealous or don't know any thing.
Above axlarry has raised good points on this, still this article really feels logical impression.

 

Very good article. Answers a lot of the rumors that seem to prevail throughout the boards. But honestly, I'll always prefer SEF urls vs. numbers and special characters in the URL no matter what the engineers say.

 

this article will remove misunderstanding of most seo

 

Check your website and see how much SEO you have done on it.

 

From Google Webmaster Guidelines

Now you see why static (looking) urls are better than dynamic urls. Google told us so! And now I'm confused about this recent update.
Why did they say :
Myth: "Dynamic URLs cannot be crawled."
Myth: "Dynamic URLs are okay if you use fewer than three parameters."

Hey Google! It's in your webmaster guidelines!

 

There's been a lot of talk about this across the net over the last few days.

On the Sphinn thread below Matt Cutts has made a couple of posts about it all:

http://sphinn.com/story/74522

 

Those are old guidelines. That's why they issued the update.

 

This has been holy SEO grail for years now...

Now the message is - it's not that important at all really...

 

It hasn't been important for a long time. It's just that many people cling stubbornly to old 1999 SEP principles.

 

So clearly doing something like this: http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=1045442&highlight=change+URLs would not be worth it...

 

Hi,

For a New SEO Who does not know Better Programming will sure face a big problem, Soon every one need to learn programming well.

after-all thanks to for this article

 

I did, minstrel, I did.

If you don't believe in keywords in URLs - okay.... I do.

 

It's not a matter of faith. It's a matter of empirical evidence.