Why Doesn't Google Count http://www and http:// As The Same?

I was reading this thread - it boiled down to different versions of the same URL having different PR.

I have seen the same on one of the sites I run:

http://chavmum.co.uk/ is a PR5 whilst www.chavmum.co.uk/ is a PR4 despite both being the same page. As far as I can tell its down to the variety of link people use to link to the site. I always put the http:// chavmum version as the link. But people sometimes link to the www. version.

It seems strange that Google and other engines should count them as different URLs - you'd think that they'd be able to combine the results. I'm sure if they combined the links, there may be enough of a pool to be a PR6 possibly? Its a waste of natural backlinks in a sense

Anyone know why they count them different - I can't see any real reason myself.

 

google is not the only one, cookies treat above s different domains

 

You should use a 301 redirect. For example, in .htaccess would be like this:

RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www.domain.com
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.domain.com/$1 [R=permanent,L]

Code (markup):

if you want them to go to www (can be done www to without)

 

hmm I never knew that was still in effect since I see the same pr on my sites

 

Not sure why they do it but as they are seen as two sites could there be a penalty for dup content?

 

Would that affect how Google counts the backlinks though. I wouldn't have thought it would make a difference? If google sees 20 links to http://www.chavmum.co.uk and 20 links to http://chavmum.co.uk it would still count them as seperate rather than as 40 backlinks to 1 site. I'm guessing the HTacess on my site wouldn't affect how google decides PR, which is the problem here.

I'm not worried if people go to either version, just how Google counts them on other sites for PR purposes.

 

PR is counted for each page not for entire site. 301 redirect will help you.

 

Are you sure? A 301 redirect is supposed to make Google count old site's links and new site's links as links for the new domain. If you have 20 links in old URL and 20 in new, Google will count for your new site more or less 40 links. Also Google will deindex one of the URLs (which you choose), which can be good. Also, think about this, when I post a link, I just go to adress bar and copy paste url, new links will go to the new URL, also. In such redirects I have never had any problem.

There are lots of threads saying the same I tell you, just do a little search in Google, this is a frequent question why we should have only one possible

 

Davilac, I think you're misunderstanding what I'm getting at. Google doesn't look at my site to count backlinks to my site does it? I think I might have said backlinks earlier when I meant external links to my site.

I have no control over how people link to me when its organic linking. Some will do the www version because for your average web user, all sites must have a www on them - others will just do the http:// and omit the www bit.

The problem is why doesn't google lump all the links its sees to chavmum.co.uk as one thing, rather than lumping the ones to http://www.chavmum.co.uk as one lot of backlinks and http://chavmum.co.uk as another lot of backlinks - creating two seperate PRs for my pages?

 

I don't know why Google doesn't do that nor why, just I think that would be because www and non-www are different subdomains.

I can only give you my advise.

 

And its appreciated - so you think the redirect as you have it would then fix that problem when it came to figuring out page rank?

 

Because the www is essentially a subdomain.

DIfferent subdomains can be entirely different sites hence they are seen as such by the engines.

Example:

topic1.yoursite.com
angrybeavers.yoursite.com
www.yoursite.com
funstuff.yoursite.com

 

Ok I never realised the www. was considered a subdomain - so if I add the rewrite mentioned here, Google will come to my site first to pick up the htacess, then count all different flavours of link as to one domain?

 

About Chavmum, I would redirect www to nonwww, cause is now your main url, if you redirect www to nonwww you won't loose anything. But if you use my code then you will redirect nonwww to www, and as far as I see, that maybe would not be good for you, cause your links and your indexed pages are without www, and you would loose them.

To sum up, what you must think:

You must decide between www and non www, then you must redirect by .htaccess. When you do that, you will loose your indexed pages in one of the urls, but your links will be counted as preferred's urls links. Redirecting to your preferred url also may help Google understand you haven't duplicated content.

 

I prefer the non www version - the www is so 90s...

So the code above is correct for that purpose then? I just change details.

 

Try this :

Options +FollowSymLinks
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} .
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^domain\.com$
RewriteRule (.*) http://domain.com/$1 [R=301,L]

Code (markup):

 

Thanks Davilac - live and learn.

Shawn - that's complete news to me - would you do that by setting up a subdomain called www? This is all news to me!