Yo, this is... going too far, c'mon now.
While sure, www seems odd now, it's still a subdomain and we're inching into territory of obscuring things that matter for small gains in end-user perception that aren't _that_ impactful.
While sure, www seems odd now, it's still a subdomain and we're inching into territory of obscuring things that matter for small gains in end-user perception that aren't _that_ impactful.
See: http://to. (it redirects to an advertising/malware site for me, so be warned)
I've heard people say "backslash" when they insist on reading out the whole URL with protocol, which I'm pretty sure is the wrong slash, I honestly don't know, but I've never understood why people felt the need to say it at all. Do they type the protocol into the address bar when they visit sites?
oOoO
Pretty similar to 4 average characters, really.
Just a guess though.
2. Google directs user to www.example.org.
3. User sees url as example.org and notes it down.
4. User needs to visit example.org again, but for some reason it doesn't work.
5. User goes to coworker who shows him that example.org does in fact work (hidden www).
6. Endless confusion ensues.
This is bad UX decision on Google part (on top of it breaking published standards)
Perhaps they should be taught.
Otherwise let's move on to making nuclear reactors less confusing.
Developers and techies are users too and they're much less likely to call tech support in general.
This harms them far more than it helps the people who need help.
I don't know.
It seems like the confusion this change causes negates any benefit it could have.
Don't give them any ideas. They've been moving towards this path for a long time. Full paths being hidden from URLs could be up next.
Those tend to be the cases when I care very much.
The users who truly care can just click the URL bar. (Someone said you also have to press the left arrow, which if true seems like a bad decision. I would agree the full URL should always be visible whenever the cursor focus is in the URL bar.)
> How will you distinguish http://www.pool.ntp.org vs http://pool.ntp.org ?
> One takes you to the website about the project, the other goes to a random ntp server.
I come across enough sites were one or the other is broken I'd call it important.