> From:         Dave Cantrell[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent:         Tuesday, March 16, 1999 5:46 AM
>
> >The only reservation with this that's ever occurred to me
> >is that some users may be confused if a Web site doesn't begin with 'www'.
>
> Just an interesting thought I had when reading this... Quite often, several
> people where I work will have considerable difficulty with domain names.
> They want to add "www" to the front of *everything* -- even e-mail domains
> (i.e. "[log in to unmask]" instead of
> "[log in to unmask]").
>
Dave, isn't this merely an example of learning curve/exposure [particularly e-mail
addresses]? My experience is most people don't take a *class* that provides
any history/context ... the company adds e-mail, starts an intranet [or whatever],
employees rarely have instruction in using their e-mail software or browser!


> Another common occurrence is the determination
> to use the "dot com" on everything. When I was asked to work with
> contractors to set up a central location for documents that users worldwide
> could access, the management's immediate answer was to have a "dot com" web
> site, because in their minds "dot com" equates with universal access. The
> Magic Pill, so to speak.
>
I've experienced this with clients - who want to register NFPs as "dot-com" because
they don't know about "dot-org."


> Another problem I've noticed that seems to cause users to stumble, is that
> our domain names are usually longer than the "prefix.domain.suffix"
> standard, i.e. "www.ssg.gunter.af.mil", "web1.ssg.gunter.af.mil",
> "www.msg.wpafb.af.mil", etc.
>
Isn't it possible to configure the server where it will respond w/ or w/out the
<www> prefix? I thought this was a software issue.




kathy