I would have to chose "http://" because "http:/www" is invalid since there's only one slash.. :lol: .. just kidding.. It doesn't matter which one you use as long as you stick with only one. So it goes down to which of the two sounds or looks better.
Thanks for all the comments - still somewhat mixed but seems that one or the other is best for all links. I think pretty much all my internal links have www. so would the best idea be to set up 301 redirect for all incoming links with just http://mysite, redirecting them to http://www.mysite.com? is this correct? Then all pagerank is directed to 1 address?
Just thought though, I have hundreds of incoming links to individual pages rather than home page, do I have to set up a redirect for each page (wouldn't be worth it)? Think it would be easier to just leave alone and make sure I use www. for all future links.
it is different in terms of SEs so you must choose between the 2 URLs for you to use in building links.
eitherway works, but whatever way you choose to go, stick with it! its best for SEO and not getting the hammer on duplicate content!...also its easier to track stats.
There is no benefit to typing www, except for some oddly-configured servers that have "500" errors without it. There is no downside to typing it either, besides the wasted 4 bytes.
No, don't leave alone, do it with all you pages. It's easy: RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^yoursite.com [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.yoursite.com/$1 [L,R=301] More details about the effect here: WWW vs. Non-WWW