Welcome to the Q&A Forum

If you serve a different content to the crawler, that's cloaking and you will face the wrath of google (de-indexing).

If you serve different content based on user-agent/screen-width etc... It should not de-index you for cloaking.

Google has very precise instructions on what a site owner should do in your case, and serving different html and css based on user-agent is perfectly fine, as long as you follow their instructions on how to supply google crawler additional information through http headers.

One thing which is often misunderstood is duplicate content, it does penalize you in few ways but google doesn't take that into account as a site-wide ranking factor.

In other words, if you have duplicate content, google will just refuse to index the duplicate pages, which is bad, but it's not going to penalize ranking of other not-duplicate pages because there's a a lot of duplicate pages.

Duplicate pages are bad because each duplicate page is a lost opportunity to add a page to the index, and it waste crawler budget, theoretically harming the frequency google refresh your pages ranking.

Based on personal experience I can confirm what Laura said, google crawler is extremely skilled at recognizing cloaking and it's very aggressive at penalizing websites which does cloak content.

As far as I know site.com and site.com/ are two different pages of the same domain for google. That's why one of the very first thing in any to-do list when setting up a new website is to configure url rewrite to secure only one version is served and the other is redirected.

Even in the last crawl report the bug is still there, any idea when it will be fixed?

Thanks for the answer/update.

If you are not changing the IP address you don't need to change the DNS, if you change the IP address, in addition to updating the DNS records you also need to properly redirect traffic from old urls to new urls.

With IIS the best option is using url rewrite, which is very flexible but a little tricky to set up if it's the first time you do so: http://www.iis.net/learn/extensions/url-rewrite-module/creating-rewrite-rules-for-the-url-rewrite-module

Url rewrite does operate at web server level, its powerful and does the job, but you may consider doing redirects at application level, depending on the technology you use, php/dotnet/aspx/mvc you have different tools. The advantage of doing it at application level is you can redirect dynamically, in other words use an algo to translate the old urls to the new ones using whatever information is stored in the application cache, database, and so on. While using IIS url rewrite you either statically redirect each old url to a the new url or you use regular expressions or wildcards to dynamically do so. In other words using url rewrite you have a little less flexibility.

I will use it for an e-commerce website.

Due to the nature of the products the result listings are really tedious, many products with little (hard to spot) differences in characteristics.

So I like the idea of opening a chat request to offer help in selecting the right product, but to do not annoy visitors who already have cleared their mind about what to buy I would like to have some sophisticated triggers.

Seems there are too many, I tried the free trial from luckyorange and found it very buggy, I am trying now hotjar.com free trial, I will try intercom, zopim and liverperson next.

What I originally was looking for was just a chat, but I can see the market evolved a lot since last time I gave those software a look.

And now I find very much appealing to be able to buzz visitors depending on triggers, like after spending a certain amount of time on a page, etc...

No.

You work on the copy. You write a body/content of at least 1000 words with the right keyword density. With a good structure, with some images and maybe even some outbound links to authoritative sources.

You test the results and you update accordingly.

I tried their free trial today and nothing worked, they told me it should be fixed by tomorrow and I will try again.

One thing I noticed today, while testing both luckyorgange and mouseflow is that both where not able to render correctly few of page elements which are manipulated by angularjs. Here of course I am talking about recording and heatmaps.

But why not to group keywords in groups of semantic-similar keywords and then write a specific landing page optimized for those keywords and hunt for backlinks from bloggers/websites through guest posts optimized for the same keywords?

Being careful not to over-optimize anything.

Thanks Ryan.

After watching this interesting whiteboard friday on pogo-stick: http://moz.com/blog/solving-the-pogo-stick-problem-whiteboard-friday

I am left with a question... When users bounce back to search results and click elsewhere is a pogo-stick situation, ok. But if the user spend 2 minutes on the page before to go back, is that still pogo-stick?

Zopim looks very good to.

I think what MOZ is using is intercom.io, which looks full of features, have you used it in the past? What did you found more useful of their features? Did it really help improving conversions the way they advertise?

I just noticed the chat feature on moz front page, which looks very nice in terms of UX, I have been thinking of trying some live chat for a while, and just browsing the web and trying them the ones I like the most are:

• http://www.livechatinc.com/
• https://www.olark.com/features
• http://www.boldchat.com/

But I never used any, and there are many more options... Anyone has experience with some live chat software and can share some info/preferences/ideas/likes/dislikes... ?

And does anyone knows if MOZ chat is developed in house or if they are using any provider and which one?

But was your report showing the list of url considered duplicate of that url?

In my case on the right I have the duplicate url, but on the left (where the list of other url the crawler consider duplicate should be) there's written 0 page duplicate, and the list is empty.

I am aware even if two pages looks different to me could be considered duplicate by rogerbot, but in the past it was always showing the number of duplicate pages found and the list of duplicate url.

In the last crawler issues report from MOZ I can see many many pages listed as duplicate content with 0 duplicate urls.

Like this: http://imgur.com/fbikRVq

I am puzzled, what does it mean?

I am not sure the blog is the problem, if I search with a query containing the title of that article: https://www.google.it/webhp?q=antarctica+photography+safari

I can find it as third result. Which keywords are you after? Because if I narrow the search to just antartica+photography things change.

If I look at the keyword density in that article (like just using this tootl http://tools.seobook.com/general/keyword-density/), I get the impression without going black hat or irritate google copy could be a little bit more keyword focused.

The body is 900 words which is not so bad. But if I query for antarctica+photography competitors have a much larger copy and a probably better structure (headings are not just dates but do feed keywords to crawler).

Have you run a report on semrush for the domain? http://imgur.com/1pJ3G1i 229 positions is not much. Expecially given the 243 backlinks, which is not bad either: http://imgur.com/cuIwiLa

I would try to improve the copy of the articles, check the html in more depth, and review the backlinks profile for all the usual things (link quality, anchor diversity, deep linking, etc..).