http://dubroy.com/blog/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/ programming, usability, and interaction design Wed, 11 Aug 2010 20:40:29 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://dubroy.com/blog/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/comment-page-1/#comment-75211 Robert Sun, 11 Apr 2010 10:52:05 +0000 http://dubroy.com/blog/2009/03/20/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/#comment-75211 <p>Is there anyway to get the value of a 301 redirect without ruining the site for Safari users?</p> Is there anyway to get the value of a 301 redirect without ruining the site for Safari users?

]]> http://dubroy.com/blog/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/comment-page-1/#comment-27109 Patrick Sat, 21 Mar 2009 00:57:08 +0000 http://dubroy.com/blog/2009/03/20/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/#comment-27109 <p>@Peter: Good point, maybe it was a combination of the two. But it got fixed on Google soon after they made the change on CloudKick, so I think the key thing was the fact that www.cloudkick.com and cloudkick.com were seen as two sites.</p> @Peter: Good point, maybe it was a combination of the two. But it got fixed on Google soon after they made the change on CloudKick, so I think the key thing was the fact that http://www.cloudkick.com and cloudkick.com were seen as two sites.

]]> http://dubroy.com/blog/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/comment-page-1/#comment-27103 Peter Kahoun Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:29:31 +0000 http://dubroy.com/blog/2009/03/20/301-redirect-for-the-search-usability-win/#comment-27103 <p>Well, there's also the question whether the reason why google didn't recognize duplicity correctly is the www. prefix or the http/s protocol. I would bet on B).</p> Well, there’s also the question whether the reason why google didn’t recognize duplicity correctly is the www. prefix or the http/s protocol. I would bet on B).

]]>