Force redirect to non-www

[Joaquin_Olivas]

+1 I’m waiting for this

[MatsMTN]

+1 Please give us the option

[Jonas_Meishammer]

+1
Already possible with a competitor.

[Naz_Haque]

Hi @Andre and team.

Do you’ve any updates on this.

Since becoming a sitejet customer in 2021, I’ve used WiX, Weebly, Squarespace, Webflow, Dorik, webwave, and a few other CMSs for clients and they all have this feature now.

Isn’t this harming your potential to gain new clients?

I can’t understand why this is being ignored.

[Chase_Raz]

I just want to add a +1 for root (non-www) domains. It’s an absolute must that each individual brand have the choice to use www or root.

[Andre]

Hello @Naz_Haque thank you for your feedback. I can assure you that this topic has not been ignored.

We have discussed this in our meetings and also have been responsive in this thread.

As Franzi wrote in another topic:

@Franzi_Sitejet_Team

There are a lot of things we want to do - for example, we want to explore how we can utilize AI-driven tools to improve website creation, e.g. by generating the first website draft of your next project with AI. We also want to work on connecting users and sharing knowledge and designs, e.g. by providing options to share website (templates) and website sections across accounts. Of course, we also want to improve the handling of existing features like Collections or image editing options, etc.

Our overall goal will always be to improve the creation and management of websites - might that be offering new features and tools or by improving the existing usability.

If you need more freedom on infrastructural topics like this one, I like to recommend the plesk solution with Sitejet. There, you are able to realize this as well as the wishes you have regarding the mail security.

Hope this helps?

[AJ_Joe]

I fully understand the priorities, but I just want to share my opinion about this:

Personally, for now I’m keeping SiteJet on hold, because of this.

I always ask my self the question: what if my client said OK for having “www.” then he changes his mind, after building his website. Normally it shouldn’t be an issue to change it. But in reality, I have to build his website again using another tool.

[Naz_Haque]

Hi Andre,

@Andre

If you need more freedom on infrastructural topics like this one, I like to recommend the plesk solution with Sitejet. There, you are able to realize this as well as the wishes you have regarding the mail security.

Please clarify: does this mean Sitejet can deliver non-www sites when used on Plesk?

If a solution exists, why can’t that be added to Sitejet directly?

[Andre]

Hey @Naz_Haque - as a Plesk user, you will have access to the Sitejet Builder only. The rest is part of Plesk and there, you can set up your own server, decide what to do and how to do it.

For more information, I highly recommend browsing through their website: https://www.plesk.com/

If a solution exists, why can’t that be added to Sitejet directly?

Because Plesk is not Sitejet and Sitejet is not Plesk. Sitejet has been made available for Plesk user but is also still available as Sitejet you know before. The version you are using is Sitejet Studio which includes the website builder and the project manager and has their own infrastructure set up.

You can also find a few more information on our website

[AJ_Joe]

@Andre

If you need more freedom on infrastructural topics like this one, I like to recommend the plesk solution with Sitejet. There, you are able to realize this as well as the wishes you have regarding the mail security.

Hi @Andre,

According to this quote, you mean that I should subscribe to Plesk service in order to use SiteJet and have the ability to remove the www subdomain (even though I have already SiteJet license), right?

[Andre]

@AJ_Joe

According to this quote, you mean that I should subscribe to Plesk service in order to use SiteJet and have the ability to remove the www subdomain (even though I have already SiteJet license), right?

Hey @AJ_Joe - I was just stating that the Sitejet Website Builder is now integrated in Plesk - who are also part of the Webpros family. → Sitejet Builder for Plesk - Plesk

There, you would have your own server and certain limitations in Sitejet Studio are not limited on Plesk. You would be able now to copy your content over to another website as well.

[AJ_Joe]

Hey @Andre,

Thank you for your answer.

But this does not answer my question: the Plesk service is a separate service from SiteJet (even though it integrates SiteJet for free).
Should I subscribe to Plesk service, or I have access to it as a SiteJet user (using the same license of SiteJet)?

Will Sitejet be removed as a standalone app in the long term (and will only be available though Plesk)?
Are you pushing SiteJet users towards using Plesk instead of SiteJet?

I’m one of the early adopter buyers (on AppSumo). I bought the highest agency plan to use SiteJet as a standalone app.
If my client wants his site to be without www, then I have to look for another solution (even though I bought SiteJet for my agency clients). This is not a flexible solution.

This feature request is one of the basics.

I hope you understand my situation. And I would ask you to be transparent regarding the future of SiteJet as standalone app and their users.

[Andre]

@AJ_Joe

Should I subscribe to Plesk service, or I have access to it as a SiteJet user (using the same license of SiteJet)?

Hey Aj, Plesk is a service on its own of course. So it is different from having an account with Sitejet Studio.

Will Sitejet be removed as a standalone app in the long term (and will only be available though Plesk)?
Are you pushing SiteJet users towards using Plesk instead of SiteJet?

No, nothing like that is being discussed or planned. And I have not heard otherwise. Sitejet Studio is and will be the stand-alone and legacy version. Sitejet has just been strongly connected to other partners like Plesk and cPanel who are also part of Webpros.

As you might have seen we have natively integrated our friends from Xovi into Sitejet. (Just as an example). So it works both ways

I’m one of the early adopter buyers (on AppSumo). I bought the highest agency plan to use SiteJet as a standalone app.

Ah, I remember. So that was actually a few years in our second campaing with AppSumo. So many great new members and users came to us during that time!

If my client wants his site to be without www, then I have to look for another solution (even though I bought SiteJet for my agency clients). This is not a flexible solution.
This feature request is one of the basics.

I think I did raise a few points already on this feature request. Just to make it clear, the feature request is still open and still on our list. If something in that direction will change and depending on the votes gets voted higher and put on the roadmap, I will inform everybody

Personally (!), I think that is some wasted focus, because you can literally put your URL without the www on any business card and type it in without the www and most browsers don’t even show it anyways anymore. And I did make it clear to my clients quite quickly - just to share my experience on this

That does not mean, that I don’t understand why some still want this

[Naz_Haque]

Hi Andre,

This isn’t a wasted focus as explained here: Force redirect to non-www - #13 by Naz_Haque

And clarified further here: Force redirect to non-www - #15 by Naz_Haque

I take your key point of adding +1 as a comment so you see this as a vote for this feature request.

Although I’ve commented multiple times on this thread, I’ve not stated a +1, so I shall do so now and encourage those who’ve commented to do the same.

FYI to
@Vital_Tech_Results
@Lucian_Dinu
@AJ_Joe

[Naz_Haque]

@Andre

This is a polite heads-up if you start seeing lots of +1s here and wonder where the traffic has come from.

I’m encouraging my friends and associates who are Sitejet customers to enter this community.

They’re unaware of this group and are members of the Facebook group.

[Ken_Moo]

+100!

Forcing a website redirect from www to non-www ensures our site looks professional and ranks well in search results. It keeps things tidy by collecting visitor data under one address, preventing confusion, and avoiding search engine penalties for duplicate content. It’s a small tweak with big benefits .

Pls implement soon

[Andre]

Hey Naz, your vote and your comments definitely has been taken into account for these feature requests

[Andre]

@Ken_Moo

Forcing a website redirect from www to non-www ensures our site looks professional and ranks well in search results. It keeps things tidy by collecting visitor data under one address, preventing confusion, and avoiding search engine penalties for duplicate content. It’s a small tweak with big benefits .

Pls implement soon

Thank you! Would you have a source for this?

Also, I am not sure if I understand, where is the duplicate content?

[Lucian_Dinu]

Hi!
I have not seen anywhere that Google is penalizing in some way the www vs the non-www. From the looks of it is just a matter of preference.
If you add your domain to Google Search Console, then Google will automatically figure out what to use.
By the way, many well-known websites are using www without any problems.

1. apple.com - redirects to www.apple.com
2. microsoft.com - redirects to www.microsoft.com
3. google.com -redirects to www.google.com
4. facebook.com - redirects to www.facebook.com
   … and so on.

Hope this helps.