Simple SEO URL (OLD version) [support thread]

[SPH]

I have back button/page_not_found problem too for firefox and chrome. i use simple ssu and 1.3.9h

Take a look at the back button/page not found fix in post no. 1 here:

http://www.zen-cart.com/showthread.p...gation-history

It worked for me on my ZC1.5.1 using Ultimate SEO URL and my 1.3.9h cart using Simple SEO.

Got tip from the new Ultimate SEO URL thread here, post no. 57:

http://www.zen-cart.com/showthread.p...t-Thread/page6

[noname]

My Zen cart is v1.3.9h. I have installed SSU successful but I recognized weird things happening in Who's Online. Before installing SSU, I've never saw this link "/favicon.ico", and duplicate IPs is only 1, 2, or 3, but now, I see tons of "/favicon.ico" and they are from duplicate IPs, around 19 duplicate IPs. I still see other people browsing my website with products and categories no problem, so I really wonder why this things happen. Could anyone please help me? Thanks in advanced.

[corseter]

Has anyone been able to get the Edit Cart Mod to work with Simple SEO. I am using 3.8.5 on 1.3.8. Yes I know it's old but I don't want to change it yet.
Would appreciate any suggestions to get the two to work together. Edit Cart works great when Simple SEO is off but I don't want that.

[fairestcape]

Edit Cart works great when Simple SEO is off but I don't want that.

Your whole site will work better and be more reliable without this mod. It contributes nothing to SEO. You would do well to visit schema.org and then look at: http://pro-webs.net/blog/2012/09/25/...org-microdata/ ...

... to see where real SEO is heading. There is no advantage to re-writing URL's, and a lot of risks.

[DivaVocals]

Has anyone been able to get the Edit Cart Mod to work with Simple SEO. I am using 3.8.5 on 1.3.8. Yes I know it's old but I don't want to change it yet.
Would appreciate any suggestions to get the two to work together. Edit Cart works great when Simple SEO is off but I don't want that.

While folks continue to use the support threads of these modules to champion for their non-use, I think there are other MORE important things that you need to be made aware of.. (and so it's clear I don't think re-writer modules do anything useful or magical for SEO, but there are PLENTY of other good business reasons to use a re-writer module)

Dunno if you noticed, but the author of this mod is no longer actively supporting this or any of their other modules and there has been no one in the community who has stepped in to take over as it's active maintainer.. Add to this that you are using an old unsupported (and BUGGY) version of Zen Cart, and I am not sure you are going to get much help/support for this particular module at all. With the exception of unanswered support questions/queries, and off-topic commentaries, this support thread has been pretty inactive for some time now. I know that doesn't help you now with your question, but it might give you a compelling reason to consider that this might be the time to upgrade your store. As URL re-writing modules go, this one always was the most problematic IMHO, and if you upgrade and still want to maintain your re-written URLs, you will want to look at modules that are working and supported.. (SSU is NOT one of them)

[fairestcape]

As URL re-writing modules go, this one always was the most problematic...

... Suggesting that all the others are problematic too - but less so ?

[DivaVocals]

... Suggesting that all the others are problematic too - but less so ?

Right.. Not suggesting any such thing.. Respectfully I am disagreeing with your POV which based on some of your past posts you are backing up that POV by using user installation errors as the basis of the "problematic" moniker you assign to these modules.

You will get no argument from me that URL re-writer modules are no magic bullet for SEO no matter what people continue to believe.. Based on your posts, it's clear that you consider them "unnecessary".. I think there are other business reasons for using a URL re-writer, and as long as folks using these modules understand that they are not the SEO booster they think they are, there's nothing wrong with installing a URL re-writer for having nicer URLs.. ANY module installed incorrectly can cause issues (which is the sum total of the kinds of posts reported in the support threads of the "others") .. Ceon URI and Ultimate SEO are both pretty solid/stable and supported URL re-writer modules.. SSU hasn't been any of these things in quite sometime.. SSU was abandoned by the author and has a series of issues that correctly installed or not will rear their ugly little head because there are parts of this module that are just buggy. THAT makes this one TRULY a "problematic" module..

[fairestcape]

Right.. Not suggesting any such thing.. Respectfully I am disagreeing with your POV which based on some of your past posts you are backing up that POV by using user installation errors as the basis of the "problematic" moniker you assign to these modules.

You will get no argument from me that URL re-writer modules are no magic bullet for SEO no matter what people continue to believe.. Based on your posts, it's clear that you consider them "unnecessary".. I think there are other business reasons for using a URL re-writer, and as long as folks using these modules understand that they are not the SEO booster they think they are, there's nothing wrong with installing a URL re-writer for having nicer URLs.. ANY module installed incorrectly can cause issues (which is the sum total of the kinds of posts reported in the support threads of the "others") .. Ceon URI and Ultimate SEO are both pretty solid/stable and supported URL re-writer modules.. SSU hasn't been any of these things in quite sometime.. SSU was abandoned by the author and has a series of issues that correctly installed or not will rear their ugly little head because there are parts of this module that are just buggy. THAT makes this one TRULY a "problematic" module..

... just yanking your chain Diva.

I just find it so sad that so many people believe URL re-writes are going to magically rank them better on the SE's. I attend a LOT of programming seminars in London and Capetown - particularly those that focus on SEO issues relating to code. Everyone I listen to (and chat to) advises developers steer well clear of URL re-writing. Over the last 18 months / 2 years the discussion has focused largely on the Semantic Web and the embedding of MicroData tags into the page HTML as this is where the future lies.

"Pages" will no longer be "ranked", and <meta headers> will become all but irrelevant. CONTENT within the page will be "benchmarked" and "rated" according to how well it meets the item defines (depending on which XMLNS protocol being used.)

Quite frankly I don't care if people use these "useless and risky" plugins - and if they compete with any of our clients' websites, then I actively encourage to install URL Re-writing, as the likelihood that they will break their site is quite high - meaning that we have fewer competitors to worry about!

[DivaVocals]

... just yanking your chain Diva.

I knew that..

I just find it so sad that so many people believe URL re-writes are going to magically rank them better on the SE's. I attend a LOT of programming seminars in London and Capetown - particularly those that focus on SEO issues relating to code. Everyone I listen to (and chat to) advises developers steer well clear of URL re-writing. Over the last 18 months / 2 years the discussion has focused largely on the Semantic Web and the embedding of MicroData tags into the page HTML as this is where the future lies.

"Pages" will no longer be "ranked", and <meta headers> will become all but irrelevant. CONTENT within the page will be "benchmarked" and "rated" according to how well it meets the item defines (depending on which XMLNS protocol being used.)

And again.. you get no argument from me with regards to these modules having ZERO effect on SEO, and the fact that there are many who still beleive in this brand of SEO snakeoil... I still believe that there are other very valid business reasons to want nicer URLs, and for those shopowners who want to install a re-writer, I encourage them to install one of the two which are stable and supported.

Quite frankly I don't care if people use these "useless and risky" plugins - and if they compete with any of our clients' websites, then I actively encourage to install URL Re-writing, as the likelihood that they will break their site is quite high - meaning that we have fewer competitors to worry about!

You say that, but that you do seem to enthusiastically enjoy posting your "just say no to re-writers" message in the support threads of these modules.. From the outside, it sure looks like you do care on some level..

However to your last point which implies that one is MORE likely to break their site simple BECAUSE they installed once of these modules I will say this again.. Anyone can break ANY site with an INCORRECTLY installed module.. (the posts in the support threads for the most popular Zen Cart modules will bear this out..) To imply that ALL URL re-writer modules will break a site simply because it is installed is a tad misleading.. SSU is buggy, broken, unsupported, and IS likely to break one's site especially if one is running Zen Cart v1.3.9 or v1.5 not because it's URL re-writer, but because it's buggy broken, and unsupported. The others cannot be described in the same manner. Ceon URI or Ultimate SEO if installed correctly will not break one's site simply because it's there..

[DivaVocals]

DO OVER.. Just wanted to clean up my post a tad.. (this is why one should not post while in the middle of a conference call )

... just yanking your chain Diva.

I knew that..

I just find it so sad that so many people believe URL re-writes are going to magically rank them better on the SE's. I attend a LOT of programming seminars in London and Capetown - particularly those that focus on SEO issues relating to code. Everyone I listen to (and chat to) advises developers steer well clear of URL re-writing. Over the last 18 months / 2 years the discussion has focused largely on the Semantic Web and the embedding of MicroData tags into the page HTML as this is where the future lies.

"Pages" will no longer be "ranked", and <meta headers> will become all but irrelevant. CONTENT within the page will be "benchmarked" and "rated" according to how well it meets the item defines (depending on which XMLNS protocol being used.)

And again.. you get no argument from me with regards to these modules having ZERO effect on SEO.. The fact that there are many business owners who still believe and rather are COUNTING on this form of SEO snakeoil is indeed very sad (and frankly makes me giggle sometimes)... That said, I still believe that there are other very valid business reasons to want nicer URLs, and for those shopowners who want to install a re-writer to achieve that, I encourage them to install one of the two which are stable and supported. (and it's NOT SSU)

Quite frankly I don't care if people use these "useless and risky" plugins - and if they compete with any of our clients' websites, then I actively encourage to install URL Re-writing, as the likelihood that they will break their site is quite high - meaning that we have fewer competitors to worry about!

You say that, but that you do seem to enthusiastically enjoy posting your "just say no to re-writers" message in the support threads of these modules quite frequently.. From the outside, it sure looks like you do care on some level..

However to your last point which implies that one is MORE likely to break their site simply BECAUSE they installed one of these modules I will say this again.. Anyone can break ANY site with any INCORRECTLY installed module.. (the posts in the support threads for the most popular Zen Cart modules will bear this out..) To imply that ALL URL re-writer modules will break a site simply because a URL re-writer has been installed is a tad misleading I would think..

SSU is buggy, broken, unsupported, and IS likely to break one's site especially if one is running Zen Cart v1.3.9 or v1.5 not because it's a URL re-writer module, but because it's buggy, broken, and unsupported. The "others" in this class of modules cannot be described in the same manner. ANY buggy, broken, and unsupported module can have the same undesired effect on one's store. So I think the message to shopowners should be to NOT install ANY buggy, broken, and unsupported modules of ANY kind.. Ceon URI or Ultimate SEO if installed correctly will not break one's site simply because it's there.. Plenty of users of these modules can attest to that.. SSU in it's current state is another story altogether because (say it with me ) it's buggy, broken, and unsupported..