Search Results

Search found 28 results on 2 pages for 'lsp'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • SEO non-English domain name advice

    - by Dominykas Mostauskis
    I'm starting a website, that is meant for a non-English region, using an alphabet that is a bit different than that of English. Current plan is as follows. The website name, and the domain name, will be in the local language (not English); however, domain name will be spelled in the English alphabet, while the website's title will be the same word(s), but spelled properly with accents. E.g.: 'www.litterat.fr' and 'Littérat'. Does the difference between domain name and website name character use influence the site's SEO? Is it better, SEO-wise, to choose a name that can be spelled the same way in the English alphabet? From my experience, when searching online, invariably, the English alphabet is used, no matter the language, so people will still be searching 'litterat' (without accents and such). Edit: To sum up: Things have been said about IDN (Internationalized domain name). To make it simple, they are second-level domain names that contain language specific characters (LSP)(e.g. www.café.fr). Here you can check what top-level domains support what LSPs. Check initall's answer for more info on using LSPs in paths and queries. To answer my question about how and if search engines relate keywords spelled with and without language specific characters: Google can potentially tell that series and séries is the same keyword. However, (most relevant for words that are spelled differently across languages and have different meanings, like séries), for Google to make the connection (or lack thereof) between e and é, it has to deduce two things: Language that you are searching in. Language of your query. You can specify it manually through Advanced search or it guesses it, sometimes. I presume it can guess it wrong too. The more keywords specific to this language you use the higher Google's chance to guess the language. Language of the crawled document, against which the ASCII version of the word will be compared (in this example – series). Again, check initall's answer for how to help Google in understanding what language your document is in. Once it has that it can tell whether or not these two spellings should be treated as the same keyword. Google has to understand that even though you're not using french (in this example) specific characters, you're searching in French. The reason why I used the french word séries in this example, is that it demonstrates this very well. You have it in French and you have it in English without the accent. So if your search query is ambiguous like our series, unless Google has something more to go on, it will presume that there's no correlation between your search and séries in French documents. If you augment your query to series romantiques (try it), Google will understand that you're searching in French and among your results you'll see séries as well. But this does not always work, you should test it out with your keywords first. For example, if you search series francaises, it will associate francaises with françaises, but it will not associate series with séries. It depends on the words. Note: worth stressing that this problem is very relevant to words that, written in plain ASCII, might have some other meanings in other languages, it is less relevant to words that can be, by a distinct margin, just some one language. Tip: I've noticed that sometimes even if my non-accented search query doesn't get associated with the properly spelled word in a document (especially if it's the title or an important keyword in the doc), it still comes up. I followed the link, did a Ctrl-F search for my non-accented search query and found nothing, then checked the meta-tags in the source and you had the page's title in both accented and non-accented forms. So if you have meta-tags that can be spelled with language specific characters and without, put in both. Footnote: I hope this helps. If you have anything to add or correct, go ahead.

    Read the article

  • Wireless Network suddenly cant connect after Windows update

    - by vinir
    UPDATE: As my patience started to end, the laptop started to display symptoms of other malfunctions, so I ended up returning it to Asus and actually had the price of the laptop back in store credit. I did not solve the problem per se, but as I don't have the notebook and the screen, the keyboard, the touchpad and other parts were malfunctioning, I can safely assume that it was put to rest. I don't know how to behave when my question isn't actually answered, but was "solved", so I placed this over here. Anyone that knows how to end this topic, I would appreciate the heads up. Thanks for everything, everyone, it's nice to see that this topic in the community was active even when all this time had passed. vinir So I bought an ASUS K43E notebook earlier this year and built a wireless conection to link it to. It worked great for the first weeks, but then I updated my Windows 7 Home Basic with the daily updates; After that my home network couldn't be reached no matter what I did. I have linux on dual boot on the same notebook and it can connect to my home wireless network flawlessly. I have a hunch that it's somehow related to the Network Profile settings. I have noticed my network was set as "Home network", but after the system updates I got changed to "Public". Now I can't connect to it to change the profile settings. My Atheros Network adapter is updated to the latest driver (march 2012), and I still can't connect. The funny thing is that the same thing happened to my mother's notebook, as it has the same Network Adapter, Atheros AR9285, as I recall it. I managed to fix it on my mother's computer by using an specific network LSP and profiling reset that was available through her notebook's antivirus program, avast! Internet Security. I can't get that to work on my notebook, but I suspect that some related tool might just make it work too. So the question is: how to modify a network's profile and settings that were stored in my notebook? I can't connect to the specific network on Windows, as stated before.

    Read the article

  • 6 Facts About GlassFish Announcement

    - by Bruno.Borges
    Since Oracle announced the end of commercial support for future Oracle GlassFish Server versions, the Java EE world has started wondering what will happen to GlassFish Server Open Source Edition. Unfortunately, there's a lot of misleading information going around. So let me clarify some things with facts, not FUD. Fact #1 - GlassFish Open Source Edition is not dead GlassFish Server Open Source Edition will remain the reference implementation of Java EE. The current trunk is where an implementation for Java EE 8 will flourish, and this will become the future GlassFish 5.0. Calling "GlassFish is dead" does no good to the Java EE ecosystem. The GlassFish Community will remain strong towards the future of Java EE. Without revenue-focused mind, this might actually help the GlassFish community to shape the next version, and set free from any ties with commercial decisions. Fact #2 - OGS support is not over As I said before, GlassFish Server Open Source Edition will continue. Main change is that there will be no more future commercial releases of Oracle GlassFish Server. New and existing OGS 2.1.x and 3.1.x commercial customers will continue to be supported according to the Oracle Lifetime Support Policy. In parallel, I believe there's no other company in the Java EE business that offers commercial support to more than one build of a Java EE application server. This new direction can actually help customers and partners, simplifying decision through commercial negotiations. Fact #3 - WebLogic is not always more expensive than OGS Oracle GlassFish Server ("OGS") is a build of GlassFish Server Open Source Edition bundled with a set of commercial features called GlassFish Server Control and license bundles such as Java SE Support. OGS has at the moment of this writing the pricelist of U$ 5,000 / processor. One information that some bloggers are mentioning is that WebLogic is more expensive than this. Fact 3.1: it is not necessarily the case. The initial edition of WebLogic is called "Standard Edition" and falls into a policy where some “Standard Edition” products are licensed on a per socket basis. As of current pricelist, US$ 10,000 / socket. If you do the math, you will realize that WebLogic SE can actually be significantly more cost effective than OGS, and a customer can save money if running on a CPU with 4 cores or more for example. Quote from the price list: “When licensing Oracle programs with Standard Edition One or Standard Edition in the product name (with the exception of Java SE Support, Java SE Advanced, and Java SE Suite), a processor is counted equivalent to an occupied socket; however, in the case of multi-chip modules, each chip in the multi-chip module is counted as one occupied socket.” For more details speak to your Oracle sales representative - this is clearly at list price and every customer typically has a relationship with Oracle (like they do with other vendors) and different contractual details may apply. And although OGS has always been production-ready for Java EE applications, it is no secret that WebLogic has always been more enterprise, mission critical application server than OGS since BEA. Different editions of WLS provide features and upgrade irons like the WebLogic Diagnostic Framework, Work Managers, Side by Side Deployment, ADF and TopLink bundled license, Web Tier (Oracle HTTP Server) bundled licensed, Fusion Middleware stack support, Oracle DB integration features, Oracle RAC features (such as GridLink), Coherence Management capabilities, Advanced HA (Whole Service Migration and Server Migration), Java Mission Control, Flight Recorder, Oracle JDK support, etc. Fact #4 - There’s no major vendor supporting community builds of Java EE app servers There are no major vendors providing support for community builds of any Open Source application server. For example, IBM used to provide community support for builds of Apache Geronimo, not anymore. Red Hat does not commercially support builds of WildFly and if I remember correctly, never supported community builds of former JBoss AS. Oracle has never commercially supported GlassFish Server Open Source Edition builds. Tomitribe appears to be the exception to the rule, offering commercial support for Apache TomEE. Fact #5 - WebLogic and GlassFish share several Java EE implementations It has been no secret that although GlassFish and WebLogic share some JSR implementations (as stated in the The Aquarium announcement: JPA, JSF, WebSockets, CDI, Bean Validation, JAX-WS, JAXB, and WS-AT) and WebLogic understands GlassFish deployment descriptors, they are not from the same codebase. Fact #6 - WebLogic is not for GlassFish what JBoss EAP is for WildFly WebLogic is closed-source offering. It is commercialized through a license-based plus support fee model. OGS although from an Open Source code, has had the same commercial model as WebLogic. Still, one cannot compare GlassFish/WebLogic to WildFly/JBoss EAP. It is simply not the same case, since Oracle has had two different products from different codebases. The comparison should be limited to GlassFish Open Source / Oracle GlassFish Server versus WildFly / JBoss EAP. But the message now is much clear: Oracle will commercially support only the proprietary product WebLogic, and invest on GlassFish Server Open Source Edition as the reference implementation for the Java EE platform and future Java EE 8, as a developer-friendly community distribution, and encourages community participation through Adopt a JSR and contributions to GlassFish. In comparison Oracle's decision has pretty much the same goal as to when IBM killed support for Websphere Community Edition; and to when Red Hat decided to change the name of JBoss Community Edition to WildFly, simplifying and clarifying marketing message and leaving the commercial field wide open to JBoss EAP only. Oracle can now, as any other vendor has already been doing, focus on only one commercial offer. Some users are saying they will now move to WildFly, but it is important to note that Red Hat does not offer commercial support for WildFly builds. Although the future JBoss EAP versions will come from the same codebase as WildFly, the builds will definitely not be the same, nor sharing 100% of their functionalities and bug fixes. This means there will be no company running a WildFly build in production with support from Red Hat. This discussion has also raised an important and interesting information: Oracle offers a free for developers OTN License for WebLogic. For other environments this is different, but please note this is the same policy Red Hat applies to JBoss EAP, as stated in their download page and terms. Oracle had the same policy for OGS. TL;DR; GlassFish Server Open Source Edition isn’t dead. Current and new OGS 2.x/3.x customers will continue to have support (respecting LSP). WebLogic is not necessarily more expensive than OGS. Oracle will focus on one commercially supported Java EE application server, like other vendors also limit themselves to support one build/product only. Community builds are hardly supported. Commercially supported builds of Open Source products are not exactly from the same codebase as community builds. What's next for GlassFish and the Java EE community? There are conversations in place to tackle some of the community desires, most of them stated by Markus Eisele in his blog post. We will keep you posted.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2