# why is www. is not needed?



## liverp007

sorry for being ignorant, i come across URL that need not type the www. in front of the domain name. Is there any different between those name with www. , http:// and those simply with nothing infront? thanks in advance.


----------



## PC eye

It depends on the type of server as well as nature of the site. I often see tv shows with something like http://  with name of the program going " show.tv@"  and then the dot com or dot net follows that. One well known online vendor is found at http://TigerDirect.com  Notice the hyperlink immediately appears as it is a valid address for a web site. Once you arrive at the site simply look at how the remaining information is automatically filled in.


----------



## apj101

wiki can put it much better than i


> "WWW" is commonly found at the beginning of web addresses. Many organizations on the Internet follow the convention of naming hosts according to the services they provide. So for example, the host name for a web server is "www"; for an FTP server it's "ftp"; or a news server is "news" or "nntp" (after the news protocol NNTP). The host names are then used as DNS subdomain names, giving the full "www.example.com".
> 
> These prefixes are not required by any technical standard; indeed, the first Web server was at "info.cern.ch" [citation needed] and even today many websites are available without the "www" prefix.
> 
> Some browsers will automatically try adding "www." to the beginning, and possibly ".com" to the end, of typed URLs if a web page isn't found without them. Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox will automatically prefix 'http://www.' and append '.com' to the address bar contents when the Control and Enter keys are pressed simultaneously. For example, entering "example" in the address bar and then pressing Control+Enter causes the browser to visit "http://www.example.com".


----------



## PC eye

Gee And some people complain when I post info directly.  

"*(1)* Short for _*D*omain *N*ame *S*ystem_ (or _*S*ervice_ or _*S*erver_), an Internet service that translates _domain names_ into IP addresses. Because domain names are alphabetic, they're easier to remember. The Internet however, is really based on IP addresses. Every time you use a domain name, therefore, a DNS service must translate the name into the corresponding IP address. For example, the domain name _www.example.com_ might translate to _198.105.232.4_. 

The DNS system is, in fact, its own network. If one DNS server doesn't know how to translate a particular domain name, it asks another one, and so on, until the correct IP address is returned. *(2)* Short for_* d*igital *n*ervous *s*ystem,_ a term coined by Bill Gates to describe a network of personal computers that make it easier to obtain and understand information." http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/D/DNS.html


----------



## apj101

> Gee And some people complain when I post info directly.


people shouldn't complain so long as you quote your sources, and it's copyrighted


----------



## PC eye

That's the main idea from the start there. I always prefer the verified sources when posting an article of some type as a reference or update on something like DX10, a new hardware, or some new spyware chaser like the full version of Windows Defender being out.

 Most of the time the "www" is seen mainly on a site's home page. For support links for various products like Asus for example you will see "support.asus.com" following the "http://". The actual definition for "www" is simply an abbreviation for the term "world wide web". Product sites that have their own search engines for locating a list of online vendors to compares proces with will see "computers.shopping.com" without the www at times. You would then be brought to a page where you then selected from a list of catagories like video cards, monitors, cases, printers, etc. that fall under the main catagory name.


----------



## SirKenin

apj101 said:


> people shouldn't complain so long as you quote your sources, and it's copyrighted



Wiki is open source, so it's ok to quote it as long as you include your sources.

The stuff that ace posts is not ok, because it is copyrighted material, even if he includes his source.

The only thing he is allowed to do by law is quote a maximum of a couple of lines and then post a link to the actual article.  Websites such as Associated Press are getting extremely anal about this and will actually set their legal department on your ass if you violate their terms.  They get REALLY ugly.  Others will follow suit.  In fact, CF can do the same thing.


----------



## PC eye

SirKenin said:


> Wiki is open source, so it's ok to quote it as long as you include your sources.
> 
> The stuff that ace posts is not ok, because it is copyrighted material, even if he includes his source.
> 
> The only thing he is allowed to do by law is quote a maximum of a couple of lines and then post a link to the actual article. Websites such as Associated Press are getting extremely anal about this and will actually set their legal department on your ass if you violate their terms. They get REALLY ugly. Others will follow suit. In fact, CF can do the same thing.


 
 Listen "???"    For the most part I prefer to give a brief description of an article and post the links for them. As they you can point people in the right direction but they will still have to do the work.


----------



## JuggaloKillaz

think of it as this.  when you live in the same area code, lets use 206 for an example.  you dnt need to add the 206 before you call someone.  this is because it asumes what you dialing.  this is the same for the url.  it knows it world wide web so you dont need to add the www.  does it make sense?


----------



## SirKenin

JuggaloKillaz said:


> think of it as this.  when you live in the same area code, lets use 206 for an example.  you dnt need to add the 206 before you call someone.  this is because it asumes what you dialing.  this is the same for the url.  it knows it world wide web so you dont need to add the www.  does it make sense?



No, actually it doesn't.  Considering that there are at least half a dozen different types of addresses, including www, www1, www2, www3, ftp, irc, etc, then your explanation makes no sense.  Not using the prefix would make the browser assume the default, and the default may not always be the correct one.


----------



## liverp007

thanks for the reply, but too bad, i am still confuse. At some internet cafe, even after i type a name, and followed by ctr plus enter, i will get wrong website cos it is not automatically added with www infront and .com behind. Also, are you guys suggesting that i can ignore www. cos it browser will know it?


----------



## PC eye

I wouldn't suggest it. Sometimes two sites with similar names will see you arrive at the wrong one. If you type "tigerdirect.com" and press the enter you will see www.tigerdirect.com when the address is found by the browser. Or you may see a page come up with variations. Without the "com" on the end IE will display the "internet Explorer cannot display the webpage" error.


----------

