Re: domains vs sub-domains

>From the user's point of view #2 might be better i'd think that most people naturally "root" path to site name On Nov 10, 12:38 pm, Paul Menzel wrote: > Am Montag, den 09.11.2009, 21:38 -0800 schrieb Chris: > > > I've recently been in discussion about which is

Re: domains vs sub-domains

Am Montag, den 09.11.2009, 21:38 -0800 schrieb Chris: > I've recently been in discussion about which is better to have. > > http://media.example.com OR > http://example.com/media/ > > 1) The first method, I've been told, allows you to make more requests. > IE for example can only make like 4

Re: domains vs sub-domains

Hi, I personally also use option #1 due to performance, scalability and "prettiness" of URL, etc, reasons all mentioned in above posts. On the other hand if you spread your content over a bunch of sub domains you could, instead of increasing performance, downgrade it due to numerous DNS queries

Re: domains vs sub-domains

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Chris wrote: > > I've recently been in discussion about which is better to have. > > http://media.example.com OR > http://example.com/media/ > > 1) The first method, I've been told, allows you to make more requests. > IE for example can

Re: domains vs sub-domains

Chris wrote: > I've recently been in discussion about which is better to have. > > http://media.example.com OR > http://example.com/media/ > ... > Which method should I adopt? I personally like the second method, but > if it will effect performance/ loading times at all then I should go > with

domains vs sub-domains

I've recently been in discussion about which is better to have. http://media.example.com OR http://example.com/media/ 1) The first method, I've been told, allows you to make more requests. IE for example can only make like 4 requests at a given time on a given domain. but, if you use