Feeds

back to article So what's in a URL? The Reg URL?

The Register started out as a UK operation with a UK addressed web site, but accidentally and against our expectations became a pretty successful international operation. In deference to marketing we should point out that in recent years the international success has been both planned and deliberate, but that certainly isn't …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

us.theregister.co.uk

Serve them right for appropriating .com in the first place.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Really, who cares?

As a yank who's mastered typing .co.uk in a surprisingly short six years, why should this matter?

I would think the "branding" issue would be much better addressed by continuing to produce top-quality journalism.

After all, I usually am able to type "news.bbc.co.uk" instead of "cnn.com" when I want hard news. Even though it requires a few extra keystrokes, I think I can cope.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Keep .co.uk

Dear Reg Team,

I reckon you have done a fantastic job with www.theregister.co.uk and think it should stay as it is. Let the Yanks know its a UK site!

If It aint broke, dont fix it!

:-)

0
0
Anonymous Coward

I've used .co.uk for years... from the US

Hasn't broken my fingers yet... I do think the co.uk is part of the Vulture. Just my two American cents.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Noooooooo!

Please keep .co.uk - it's one of the great things that sets El Reg apart from the mass of corporate 'merkin sites. It may be a small, petty thing, but I still get a cheap kick every time I glance at the address bar and think "hell, we may be stuck with American movies, culture, government and nukes, but at least The Register is still British!"

Unlike whoever proof-reads your articles (there is no hell vile enough for you!), the .co.uk address is a good thing, and would be sorely missed (if only by me).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Left as it is

.co.uk is part of The Register's identity. It specifies that it's British and that's great. No offence to the Americans, but I like seeing that it's a UK website where it feels more... homely. Still, to me it doesn't make much of a difference either way really because I have the RSS on Google :D

0
0
Anonymous Coward

showing your roots

I have been a reader of theregister.co.uk for a good number of years. The tongue firmly in cheek approach to IT related news is something of a pleasure, in comparison to those who either report it with dry boredom or Labrador like excitement.

I can't see "theregister.com" looking or feeling right.

the .co.uk is definitely part of the brand at this point, and its also something of a warning. British humour contained within, enter at your own risk.

I think redirecting the .com to .co.uk seems a great deal more appropriate for our american cousins who can't quite manage to grasp the concept of vulture central originating from Britain, then to force loyal readers who hail from the same shores to forget theregister's origins and look up to the address bar to be greeted with a .com

At least thats my opinion on the matter.

Thats all I have to say about that.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

You must be joking

What's the matter with theregister.co.uk? Leave it alone, then get rid of elreg.com. Then bring back the rope.

0
0

us.theregister.co.uk

Well, it would make a change from the UK being considered an extension of US territory :)

Plus, if you say it with a Yorkshire accent, it sounds just right.

(PS if you decide to use dot com, then why not use us.theregister.com *as well as* uk.theregister.com? Many big companies already use this system)

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Change the URL all you want, but keep the boffinry

Personally speaking I like the "made in Britain", er, ting that goes with a .co.uk URL - perhaps no surprise coming from an Englishman.

That said it's not a deal-breaker in the way that internationalising (internationalizing?) your content would be. By that I mean US spelling, quietly dropping English like "boffins" (or the magnificent "boffinry") and whatnot.

0
0

.co.uk

I'm not from the UK, but still I feel that www.theregister.com would feel like El Reg going American, while I love its still quite Brittish touch.

Btw, why would using www.theregister.com translate to uk.theregister.co.uk while you could just let the .com address forward the reader to www.theregister.co.uk? Or are there plans to offer different content depending on read location? :-s

Anyway... I'd stay with .co.uk

0
0
Anonymous Coward

.co.uk

Its got to be the .co.uk domain, the Register is staunchly British damn it, and we shouldn't let those damn yanks get their filthy colonial mitts on it!

Plus my t-shirt would be obsolete if you change... :)

0
0
Anonymous Coward

name choice

I'm reading from Canada and consider The Register to be a UK publication catering to a global audience. As such, I like the co.uk domain and think it should be retained. To me at least, com domains come across as American which The Register is not. That's part of the reason I read it, because it isn't as self-centred as most US publications seem to be.

Go with the co.uk in my opinion. I value it and I'm not in the UK.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

You're fine either way - stress less

I was at a meeting in Scotland with Joel Spolsky. I spoke to him briefly.

He said that American businesses had NO problem dealing with British providers. So if TheRegister is concerned that a lack of .com is somehow a turn-off to a potential audience, don't worry. This is backed up by other Americans too.

If an audience is turned off by a lack of .com, then your sly puns and quirky commentary will be beyond them anyways.

Conversly, British don't mind a .com either.

So if the switch is not too expensive, just run both.

No-one that matters should be baying for your blood or setting up hate sites like: bringbacktheregister.co.uk or ihatetheregisterforswitchingto.com

You've got a great site with good content... That shines through, whatever your domain name.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

stick with .co.uk

Don't the US readers already have theregus.com? keep your branding just as it is, we should be proud of the .co.uk URL, and besides, being linked even more closley with the USA is not going to endear you to the rest of the world in these times of international stress, I thought .coms were for COMercial businesses? I know they are controlled by companies andthe government of the USA, but they are for comercial use for everyone, so it saddens me to see you calling it a country specific domain, are .org, .net the same?

Anyway, keep the .co.uk and be proud of it, its one little bit of empire we are still allowed to force onto others!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Stick with .co.uk

Changing is purely cosmetic in the address bar. Stick with your roots!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

.co.uk!

Would definitely like to vote for '.co.uk' to remain, thankyouverymuch. I fully appreciate what .com *should* mean, but at the end of the day we all know it doesn't, and it's nice to have a rare website that's proud to be British :-).

0
0

Let's go with the dot com, then

I'll be honest, my gut reaction was to baulk at the idea of going .com. I don't know what it is, perhaps a tedious sense of national pride, but with the general assumption that .com means American, it was nice that sites like the BBC and El Reg championed .co.uk, for want of a better description.

However, needs must, and it sounds like the overhaul is required. I take it there would be some sort of IP filtering which would take you to either us.etc or uk.etc based on where you're browsing from?

Sounds like a plan then, guv.

0
0

Depends

Somehow "theregister.co.uk" give more of an impression of a bunch of guys mucking about with technical news, while "theregister.com" makes you sound like a dull news site which just rehashes corporate press releases and wire stories.

Depends on which you want to sound like: the Private Eye of tech news, or The Economist.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Oh dear..

Well I would suggest sticking to the .co.uk in case some muppet in the US decides that the .com should be theres and you lose your customers off to someones idea of revenue building (a search engine portal).

Would you trust the US legal system? At least nominet are normal human beings..

Sure use the .com for the US guys but keep the UK the rest of us.

0
0

UK and International editions

Currently, you have an international/US domain name and a UK domain name both with the same mix of content. This is a waste of domain names.

Better to create "international" and "UK" editions, on different domain names, with different content filters.

I think the BBC does this quite well, although I'm not sure how their editions map to domain names.

John

0
0
Anonymous Coward

To UK or not to UK?

To us Canuks, the .co.uk suffix tells us you're not part of Bush's Surveillance System, at least not deliberately part of it. Hang on to your present moniker.

.com isn't international, it's an alias for .us. Ignore it.

Rippy

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Proud to be a dot co.uk

Should be globally branded as theregister.co.uk

While you're at it, petition Gordon Brown for a national theregister holiday.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Title

Really it makes absolutely no difference to me

0
0

My vote is for .co.uk

I started reading this site long before the .com address became available. When El Reg did start using theregister.com, I noticed that the selection of articles on .com and .co.uk were different -- that is, the .com articles seemed to be a more filtered version, with the .co.uk site having all the .com articles plus UK-specific ones. For that reason, I kept reading the .co.uk site and never looked back. Now I suppose there are a couple of reasons I think you should stay with .co.uk:

1) I would think that more people are in the habit of automatically typing (and have bookmarks pointing to) theregister.co.uk than theregister.com (and please, whatever you do, don't force us to add "www." to the address!). And I don't know about other people, but when I type an address, I expect to stay on that site; I don't expect to get redirected to a different site, even a different site controlled by the same organization (not without warning, at least).

2) El Reg id decidedly British. Much of the terminology on the site is British (and hence, not normal for probably a large percentage of your readers). If people see a .com address, they may assume US-based and not understand the terminology. Worse, people casually browsing to the site, not knowing it is British, may claim to get offended by terms such as "xxx went tits up" (or by the many double-entendre headlines).

3) And of course the most selfish reason, I'm used to theregister.co.uk, so I guess after so many years it's a source of comfort.

0
0

.co.uk

Why go yank if you don't have to?

0
0

.com Americanisation

For mine, El Reg is a British institution, and going to .com would make it feel much more American.

That said, it would still become my favorite news site, so full of color in the way you tell your tales. But would it allow for a re-count on the lappy and mobe votes?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Aaaaargh

What about airstripone.theusregister.com? Doubleplusgood url, eh?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Jingoistic Sabre rattling nonsense, etc...

Given the uniquely british humour and outlook of theregister it would probably be more appropriate that it keep .co.uk as it's primary address.

However, so long as you don't all bugger off over the pond, start using 'z' where you should be using an 's' and start saying 'dude' a bit too much then would it really matter?

Yes! Yes it would, we're proud of .co.uk and you should bloody well keep it as the primary, sod em!

A Disgruntled Northener.

0
0

I think the .com thing is just a fad.

I say that the .com thing is just a bubble waiting to burst. This "internet" is just a fad that will go the way of the pet rock. It is not a dump truck, but a series of tubes, just ask an American congressman.

Or, ok I guess you guys could go with a .com and make my life a lot easier, I think of my little vultures as international ambassadors of unsolicted editorial info, making your site a universal leader in dis-information!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Doesn't matter

I'm in the US, but visit a lot of international sites. I'm in the habit of using the country info when it's needed. I tend to view the global TLD's as global, and not necessarily just US...but then I guess I would.

0
0
Silver badge

Does it realy matter?

I mean, if all links are going to work..... Does it realy matter, as long as the Witty reporting style remains the same....

Personaly, I'd keep it the way it is now, us over here, and US over there, why change what works? Thats what users do.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Why not go for a third option?

Like theregister.net?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

www.theregister.eu

So you didn't the eu domain is that what all this soul searching is about?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Gotta keep El Reg British

The yanks have nicked everything else as their own, and enjoy rewriting history to make themselves look the heroes, so why on earth make it look to the untrained eye as though El Reg is american!

!!! KEEP EL REG BRITISH !!!

0
0
Anonymous Coward

us.theregister.co.uk

I'm in the US and I'm an employee of a company w/a growing UK presence. I started reading El Reg because I liked reading about IS/IT from the UK perspective. <i>That's</i> the part of this site I value. I will still be going to theregister.co.uk and will continue to look for the UK view.

0
0

Both national and global?

Only in the diseased mind of the American web-user. There actually IS a .us hierarchy and you can buy and use domains in that hierarchy.

.com is global and i have no issues with it - until you start getting slagged for not covering enough US issues.

0
0

us.theregister.co.uk

The .co.uk part of the URL is part of what attracted me to the Reg years ago. It suggested it wasn't a run of the mill US-centric site and this has been borne out with the British humour and stories. Losing the .co.uk to become uk.theregister.com would feel like changing into a small, after-thought subsidiary of just another US tech site and lose much of the unique Reg brand appeal.

0
0

TheReg.co.uk

Oh how I miss that URL... It had a certain symmetry.

Call me sentimental but I'd like to see that one brought back

0
0
Anonymous Coward

The Register

Keep it .co.uk. Many of your stories relate to the UK. If people cannot

manage a .co.uk then perhaps they should have their internet access

removed! I access sites is Canada, Australia and can manage .ca or .au

0
0
Anonymous Coward

I really couldn't care less...

...as long as my bookmark( www.theregister.co.uk) doesn't suddenly stop working (even if it is to redirect me to us.theregister.com).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

maintain heritage

When reading a page, i don't mind where the site is coming from. That is to say, if reading a .com, .co.uk, .fr etc. site I appreciate that it is from another country but do not mind that it is not .co.uk.

It therefore does not follow that it is "silly for US readers to read from theregister.co.uk" - thus, no need to move.

The domain should reflect where the site is based: if based in the UK, then .co.uk serves nicely, if based in the US, then .com

0
0

Big deal?

Being a reader for a number of years now, I honestly had no idea that the site was 'mirrored' accross both the .com and .co.uk domains, being an avid .co.uk user myself.

Being slightly unaware of the fact that both of these domains existed, my initial question is whether there is content that is directed exclusively at one or the other's territory (i.e. are there articles that only appear on the .co.uk or .com version of the site)? If the answer is no, then I do not see any reason to abandon the .co.uk domain for the .com one. (I guess I am also asking what is the use of a us.theregister.co.uk or uk.theregister.com sub-domain?)

After all, all major companies around the globe have to have there headquarters somewhere, and so (to me, at least) it is really a question of where your operations ultimately run from and this should determine which domain you run from. If you remain true to your current brand, then surely .co.uk is the way forward. However, one can sympathise with the decision to migrate to a .com domain, especially if this is what was originally intended.

Personally? I agree with Mark above - make a stand and adopt a us.theregister.co.uk or, maybe, force them into a us.theregister.com domain to show that the .com domain should really be non-geographic.

Anyway, kudos for this article - it says so much about El Reg's approach to journalism and the modesty with which it consults it's readership.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

www.theregister.com

www.theregister.com

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Who cares?

I relate the domain name to a physical address. Does it really matter if XYZ Corp moves from 100 Derry Road to 1555 Main Street? It's still XYZ Corp!

So long as all your customers know how to reach you, that's all that's important.

--Pete

0
0

Not sure it matters...

I usually get to the site via theregister.com, but once there, I really don't care what appears in the address bar.

0
0

Just theregister.co.uk, please

As a US reader, I enjoy the fact that The Register is a UK company. Coming here makes me feel as though I'm a bit more cosmopolitan than I really am. Perhaps it isn't wise, but I feel as though UK sources are more reliable and less biased than US sources.

0
0

Oh for heaven's sake

Is there really any competition here? Use the .co.uk domain - it differentiates you from all the US news sites, and offers a tantalising promise of proper spelling, proper humour, and non-US-centric news. Oh, and it shows you don't have to whalesong it to a .com domain just to feel like you're playing with the big boys.

Alternatively, stick with them both. You'll no doubt be keeping both domains (ahem) registered anyway.

Martin

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Keep El Reg British!

An important part of The Register's branding comes from the wry blend of insight and sarcasm lovingly injected into each article. Despite the number of global correspondents, this writing style is firmly ensconced within the subcategory of British humour, and does not deserve to be tarred with the epithet of a .com address.

Please don't fall for any Web 2.0 spin touting ".com == international"; it's as clear as a smack in the face to most people that most large .com websites live and operate from the United States.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Prefer .co.uk

Being a British reader, for slightly patriotic reasons, I would prefer the .co.uk address to be used. Many sites use .com, which has a kind of generic-ness to it. Having .co.uk gives the site (IMO) a slightly more 'unique' flavour on the international market.

Having said all that, I can completely understand why, for commercial reasons, it might make more sense to have the .com address displayed in the address bar.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.