Zen Cart Logo
Forums / All Other Contributions/Addons / Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Locked

Views: 56,875

Results 81 to 100 of 145
This thread is locked. New replies are disabled.
9 Mar 2008, 1:25 AM
#81
capnhairdo avatar

capnhairdo

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jan 2008
Posts:
38
Plugin Contributions:
1

Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Re: lack of support for Magic SEO URLs. Have just done another maddening and unproductive round of correspondence with the developer. I reported several minor issues I was having with MSEO, to which I was alternately told that the problems did not exist, weren't really problems, or were mine to deal with...and that if I didn't like it, I didn't have to use his software. Though he claims to not have enough time to offer answers to support questions, Jiri seems to have plenty of time to write combative and dismissive emails to his customers and vehemently defend the decision to make his software closed-source. Which would be fine if he'd only support it.

MSEO is a very decent product. I continue to use it. Just know that any attempts to get support or suggest improvements seem usually to become arguments. Probably easier to ask the Zen community...at least you MIGHT get an answer that way.

One issue I discovered is that products that have incorrect categorizations, e.g. associated with disabled/deleted categories or with an invalid "master" category, seem to throw a 404 with MSEO installed. The pages still come up fine, but if you look at the header, you'd see 404 instead of 200. Of course, these miscategorized products should be fixed anyway (I think it's not cool Zen even allows this to happen); but be vigilant in checking your links sitewide with MSEO installed to make sure you don't have any of these erroneous 404s popping up.

Just upgraded from 1.0 to 1.1. A few nice new features. However, suddenly all my product page URLs now have the categories removed from them (though the category page URLs themselves are fine). e.g.,

babybestbuy.com/baby-bedding-1/crib-bedding-11/vinyl-mattress-cover-438.html
is now
babybestbuy.com/vinyl-mattress-cover-438.html

Anybody else experiencing this? I suppose it's not a huge problem for us since we just launched, and attempts to hit the old URLs redirect to the new ones anyway; and it could actually be better for search engines, since the new version means no duplicate content for products that are in multiple categories.

9 Mar 2008, 1:49 AM
#82
iray avatar

iray

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jun 2007
Posts:
72
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

capnhairdo:

I reported several minor issues I was having with MSEO, to which I was alternately told that the problems did not exist, weren't really problems, or were mine to deal with...

Could you please specify** exact minor issues** you have reported?

I spend big amount of time replying to your "reported issues" which was found by you, but it looks like I waste my time...

capnhairdo:

Though he claims to not have enough time to offer answers to support questions...

I really don't know what do you mean by this (@all: I have send 17 very long emails to Mr. Cameron Clark alias capnhairdo even if I may not to do so (he decoded MSU) - this is "lack of support"...).

9 Mar 2008, 2:16 AM
#83
blessisaacola avatar

blessisaacola

Totally Zenned

Join Date:
Feb 2004
Location:
Georgia, USA
Posts:
1,875
Plugin Contributions:
1

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

capnhairdo it is unfortunate that's been your experience. We've been using MSU since October 2007 and I can honestly say the support we've received has been excellent in terms of speed and accuracy. We've never had a support that wasn't answered within 24 hours.

We even received assistance in writing custom codes to rewrite codes that were not part of the default Zen Cart for MSU processing.

I will agree with you that it's obvious at times that the founder of MSU gets to emotionally involved and takes things a bit personal in responding to email or questions. However, we've been able to get all issues we had resolved.

9 Mar 2008, 2:22 AM
#84
iray avatar

iray

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jun 2007
Posts:
72
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

BlessIsaacola:

I will agree with you that it's obvious at times that the founder of MSU gets to emotionally involved and takes things a bit personal in responding to email or questions.
I acknowledging this (it is caused by my simple/bad English - and also - some times by me :blush:).

9 Mar 2008, 2:27 AM
#85
blessisaacola avatar

blessisaacola

Totally Zenned

Join Date:
Feb 2004
Location:
Georgia, USA
Posts:
1,875
Plugin Contributions:
1

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Capnhairdo, assuming that your interest is in getting your issues resolved, I'd suggest to post your problems with the Mod (if you have any) on the forum for Magic SEO URL. That will guarantee that you get support from both MSU Team and the users on that forum. You will also be able to learn from others experience.

It's a great addition to MSU that there is forum now because I have already picked up some useful information from that forum.

9 Mar 2008, 11:47 AM
#86
londoh avatar

londoh

New Zenner

Join Date:
Oct 2007
Posts:
14
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

This thread title includes SEO_G, but I cant find a version for ZenCart.

All I can find is on the OSC site and it seems to be a very OSC only mod.

I installed it in an OSC demo site and it seems to be pretty comprehensive.

Does anybody know if its been adapted to work with ZC? and if so where I can find it?

thanks

l.

9 Mar 2008, 6:16 PM
#87
iray avatar

iray

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jun 2007
Posts:
72
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

New update version is available. Only one tiny, but one of the most requested Feature was added.

Major Changes (1.1.00 to 1.1.01)

  • URIs without trailing slash "/" at the end are now working like real folders and are redirected with HTTP 301 to correct URIs

Original announcement: http://www.magic-seo-url.com/board/magic-seo-url-for-zencart-43.html

10 Mar 2008, 3:17 AM
#88
capnhairdo avatar

capnhairdo

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jan 2008
Posts:
38
Plugin Contributions:
1

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Making this private conversation with BlessIsaacola public for the benefit/feedback of all:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that when you have a product in multiple categories, MSEO always uses the MASTER category for the product URL, rather than the current category. For example, in this category on your site:

http://www.clevershoppers.com/music-9/classical-16/

Most of these products listed are in multiple categories, and when you click on them, you end up in a completely different category, at least according to the URL, e.g.:

clevershoppers.com/dvd-videos-12/music-video-concerts-186/symphonies-the-volume-1-dvd-audio-55078.html
clevershoppers.com/featured-brands-227/so-smart-348/so-smart-musical-cd-3-pack-sleepytime-cartime-playtime-1401.html
clevershoppers.com/music-9/instrumental-26/inspired-joy-2-8126.html

But the breadcrumbs for each product show the original path (music / classical).

Even more interesting, say you were browsing the Instrumental Music category instead and clicked on the Inspired Joy CD product from there:

clevershoppers.com/music-9/instrumental-26/inspired-joy-2-8126.html

The URL now agrees with how you got there, but the breadcrumb shows a completely different category (music / classical)...and it's NOT the master category. Either way, it seems the breadcrumb and the URL are NOT related in MSEO. (They are when MSEO is not installed; Zen of course determines the current category for the breadcrumb via the cPath query string var.)

This is probably good thing in terms of not having duplicate content/pages, but it's confusing to not have the URL and the breadcrumb agree, nor to have the breadcrumb actually reflect the path you took to get a product.

BTW, which version of MSEO are you running? 1.0, or 1.1?

BlessIsaacola:

Yes! We've noticed the behavior you described and for the sake of SEO actually prefers that behavior because a product only has one url no matter how it is accessed. The way Zen Cart behaves is not desirable (although it may be user friendly). Without MSU, Zen Cart gives two ways to access any given product, i.e product_info&product_id= and cpath&product_id= which leads to one product having two url.

When a product is linked (not copied) that even present a different problems because a linked product has a master category. Depending on how you get to the product, Zen Cart decides whether to display the master category or linked category (but this is dependent on did you navigate to the product using categories or search function). You will be surprised to see different scenarios in the url depending on how you get to the product.

I am not sure what the best way is but from experience and use google analytic data, we do not see our customers finding products using categories. So we do not worry much about this and choose to do what's better for SEO which is avoid duplicate urls for same products. Most of our customers either come direct via a search result in search engines, pay per click link and once on our site most of them use the search function rather than navigating using categories, breadcrumb.

We are using MSU 1.1.

Thanks...wanted to make sure I was understanding things correctly.

I agree that the single URL approach is probably better for search engines (and that of course is the stated point of MSEO); but if MSEO is going to include the category names in th URL, I think they should be the categories that reflect how you got to a product, or they shouldn't be included at all. Same goes for the breadcrumbs; there's no point in having them there, I think, if they're not an accurate reflection of how you found something (and doubly so if they're not going to agree with the URL).

BlessIsaacola:

The only problem is if you reflect how a customer accesses a product now you're back to the original problem with duplicate url. If there are three ways to get to a product and you generate 3 urls for how the customer gets there it defeats the purpose.

I actually think Zen Cart is not treating product category right. A product should have a master category id (which they all do). No matter how a customer navigatives to a product, if a category is displayed it should always be the master category. This should be the behavior with or without MSU.

Currently when a product is linked, ZC uses the last linked category as the category in the breadcrumb (which may not be the category with the master id). This is not right.

I am not sure that most customers are comparing breadcrumb to the url.

For us we haven't seen any data to suggest this affects our sales or customers negatively so we try not dwell too much on it. MSU's way of treating url is an improvement from search engine and customer perspective (even though it's not perfect).

Yes, multiple URLs + accurate navigation path vs. single URL + incorrect navigation path...that's the conundrum here. ZC w/o MSEO chooses the former; MSEO chooses the latter. The latter is better for SEO, of course.

Of course, breadcrumbs are a different story, because they have nothing to do with multiple content. Breadcrumbs are generally used in two ways: to show the navigation path the visitor took to get to the current page; or to show all the "parent" pages (the ancestry, if you will) of the current page in your site hierarchy...which often is the same thing. But in this case of ZC and multiple product categories, these are not necessarily the same thing, and so which is the correct method?

The term "breadcrumbs" (as I understand it) originates from the story of Hansel and Gretel. I think for most users, like Hansel, breadcrumbs are most useful and intuitive when they show you how you got somewhere, rather than showing some arbitrary site hierarchy.

I agree that ZC isn't retrieving the categories correctly. When ZC doesn't know the category you want—because no category is defined in the URL (cPath)—then init_category_path.php runs zen_get_product_path() to determine and set it. zen_get_product_path() (in functions_categories.php) does a general query of the products_to_categories table to find all product/category associations. However, this query has a limit=1, so it only gets the first record it finds there. For products in only one category, this is fine; but if a product is in multiple categories, then the category it returns is essentially random. Which defeats the purpose of a "master" category. If a category is going to be determined automatically by ZenCart, it should be the master category for the product, not a random one.

This change to functions_categories.php fixes this (additions to original code in red):

  // first, try to get master category id
    $category_query = "select p2c.categories_id
                       from " . TABLE_PRODUCTS . " p, " . TABLE_PRODUCTS_TO_CATEGORIES . " p2c
                       where p.products_id = '" . (int)$products_id . "'
                       and p.products_status = '1'
                       and p.products_id = p2c.products_id and p.master_categories_id = p2c.categories_id";
  // in case the master category is invalid, fall back on getting first product/category association instead
    $category_query .= " union distinct select p2c.categories_id
                       from " . TABLE_PRODUCTS . " p, " . TABLE_PRODUCTS_TO_CATEGORIES . " p2c
                       where p.products_id = '" . (int)$products_id . "'
                       and p.products_status = '1'
                       and p.products_id = p2c.products_id limit 1";

With this change, at least the URLs and the breadcrumbs should now agree with MSEO installed.

Regarding whether customers actually pay any attention to the URL and/or breadcrumbs...most probably don't. Which is why I think that the breadcrumb should probably just be eliminated if it's not going to show the correct navigation path. Why waste the space to show it? On our site, it's even more moot because we're using the CSS click-show-hide menu, and (at least for categories with subcategories), it "remembers" which submenu (subcategory) you just came from and automatically opens it. So the breadcrumb is just redundant (if it matches the menu) or confusing (if it doesn't).

I just upgraded from MSEO 1.015 to 1.1 yesterday. Strange that the new version suddenly dropped the categories from all my URLs (as described in my previous post). It's not doing it on your store. Wonder what the difference is? Anybody else experiencing this? Which version of Zen are you running? We're on 1.37 still...wonder if that makes any difference.

Oh well...I think I actually prefer it without the category; as with the breadcrumbs, why include it if it doesn't necessarily match the navigation path? Seems better to just omit it and keep things clean, uncomplicated and unconfusing.

10 Mar 2008, 3:42 AM
#89
blessisaacola avatar

blessisaacola

Totally Zenned

Join Date:
Feb 2004
Location:
Georgia, USA
Posts:
1,875
Plugin Contributions:
1

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Well, I think a lot of this with regards to breadcrumb and url formatting is a personal preference, business and SEO objectives. Like you rightly pointed out without code modification to ZC core, when a product belongs to multiple categories ZC does not always use the master category as the category in the breadcrumb.

If I search for apple on google and google send me to a Zen Cart that sells apple, what would be right category in the breadcrumb? The issue is what has been discussed (multiple ways or multiple path of getting to product).

It's not as easy because if you have a breadcrumb for visitors to my house, well if they come in from back door, you'd want to reflect they come from back door and if they come from front door you'd want to reflect they come from front door. Zen Cart currently does not do that so the next best thing will be to use something that is consistent (master category id to determine the category in the breadcrumb).

I am not convinced that how you've described breadcrumb is the intention of how the breadcrumb in zen cart in envisioned. I don't think it's intended as some sort of tracking trail of how did you get here.

Like you rightly pointed out, the breadcrumb is not require for Zen Cart to work so you can turn it off if it doesn't meet your need.

As far as category path not showing in your url, did you regenerate a new .htaccess file after upgrading? Did you by any chance use another seo url mod prior to MSU and if so which one?

29 Mar 2008, 6:23 PM
#90
iray avatar

iray

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jun 2007
Posts:
72
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

No new posts for a long time in this thread :( Let me introduce new small MSU update version.

Major Changes (1.1.01 to 1.1.02)

  • Improved compatibility with some old mod_rewrite revisions
  • disabled Strict URLs are now officially supported
  • Strict URLs are now disabled by default
  • disabled categories are now excluded when unique path is assigned to products

Original announcement: http://www.magic-seo-url.com/board/magic-seo-url-for-zencart-62.html

29 Mar 2008, 8:55 PM
#91
swguy avatar

swguy

Administrator

Join Date:
Feb 2006
Location:
Tampa Bay, Florida
Posts:
10,710
Plugin Contributions:
56

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

If you're from the company that produces this product, I DO wish you would stop Zend encoding your stuff. It makes it incredibly painful to work with people who use your stuff, because I don't run with the Zend decoder in my stack.

31 Mar 2008, 9:03 AM
#92
website_rob avatar

website_rob

Inactive

Join Date:
Oct 2006
Location:
Alberta, Canada
Posts:
4,572
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Also seems a bit of Thread hi-jacking, to purposely keep annoucing updates to a pay-for Module when this thread is discussing the pros 'n cons of various SEO modules.

Start your own thread, iRay, leave this one alone if you have nothing to input on the Subject.

Speaking of which, having installed both; Magic SEO and Ulitmate SEO for Clients, I can state from experience that Magic SEO offers nothing more than the Ultimate SEO does. But, since Ultimate SEO is Free and does not require a link-back, it offers a lot more than Magic SEO does.

31 Mar 2008, 10:22 AM
#93
kuroi avatar

kuroi

Totally Zenned

Join Date:
Apr 2006
Location:
London, UK
Posts:
10,475
Plugin Contributions:
11

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Website Rob:

Also seems a bit of Thread hi-jacking, to purposely keep annoucing updates to a pay-for Module when this thread is discussing the pros 'n cons of various SEO modules.

Start your own thread, iRay, leave this one alone if you have nothing to input on the Subject.Agree. Emailing customers would seem a more appropriate method of keeping them up-to-date with upgrades.

31 Mar 2008, 10:55 AM
#94
iray avatar

iray

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jun 2007
Posts:
72
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Website Rob:

Also seems a bit of Thread hi-jacking, to purposely keep annoucing updates to a pay-for Module when this thread is discussing the pros 'n cons of various SEO modules.

Since there was Google AdWords auto-tagging problem discussed previously, I think it is good to let other know, that was completely solved and Strict URLs are now supported and working correctly both enabled and disabled.
Also other announcements I have posted here were coming with solutions/features which were discussed in this thread (but I agree, own thread is much more better instead of doing this mis-mush :) ).

1 Apr 2008, 4:28 AM
#95
capnhairdo avatar

capnhairdo

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jan 2008
Posts:
38
Plugin Contributions:
1

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Agree that MSEO needs its own thread for troubleshooting/product announcements.

Website Rob:

having installed both; Magic SEO and Ulitmate SEO...Magic SEO offers nothing more than the Ultimate SEO does. But, since Ultimate SEO is Free and does not require a link-back, it offers a lot more than Magic SEO does.

I also have tried both, and spent probably over 50 hours investigating, comparing, installing and troubleshooting both (plus several more hours decoding and reviewing MSEO's code and suggesting improvements to and extending it). See my previous posts in this thread. I am by no means part of the MSEO fan club—I too hate the fact that it's Zend encoded, hate the link back (got a version of MSEO with it removed), and find correspondence with the vendor often frustrating. With those disclaimers, I can state that MSEO DOES offer a bunch of features that USEO does not, not least of which is the fact that it disallows multiple URLs for pages, with automatic redirects to the one true URL for each page. Also nice is the fact that it's actually still being worked on, improved (including feature requests), and supported.

USEO 3.0, last I checked, was a half-finished dead project. 2 supports product and category pages but not much else.

In short, MSEO is just a more complete, thorough, serious product, and generally, it's much easier to install (and if not, the vendor will help you with it). I too wish it was free, but $89 is a small price to pay, and knowing what I do now, would happily pay 2-3x that for the advantages offered.

5 Apr 2008, 10:16 AM
#96
mauryg avatar

mauryg

Zen Follower

Join Date:
Jul 2006
Posts:
213
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

As long as we are comparing SEO mods, I found that Ultimate SEO will break the Edit Cart mod. Several others have reported this as well. Does anyone know if Magic SEO is compatible with the Edit Cart mod?
BTW has anyone heard any more about SEFU?

5 Apr 2008, 1:17 PM
#97
iray avatar

iray

New Zenner

Join Date:
Jun 2007
Posts:
72
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

mauryg:

Does anyone know if Magic SEO is compatible with the Edit Cart mod?
I can confirm that MSU is compatible with Edit Cart MOD.

5 Apr 2008, 2:54 PM
#98
website_rob avatar

website_rob

Inactive

Join Date:
Oct 2006
Location:
Alberta, Canada
Posts:
4,572
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

mauryg:

BTW has anyone heard any more about SEFU?

DrByte answered that question for me in another thread. Even though a default feature it is now turned OFF by default and best not to be used.

5 May 2008, 12:01 AM
#99
cdelab avatar

cdelab

New Zenner

Join Date:
Aug 2007
Posts:
47
Plugin Contributions:
0

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

Hello,

I try to post this message in another thread without success. Hope it is the good one...

I've just install the mod for ZC 1.3.7 and it works fine

I used it in a French environnement and I would like to configure it to take in account the French apostrophe when it builds links. For example :

Category = "Pour l'été" should become "pour-l-été" and not "pour-lété" as it is built by now. I need this because the keyword is "été (summer)" and not "lété".

I tried to define "special character conversion" in SEO admin but without success.

Thanks in advance for your help.

5 May 2008, 12:09 AM
#100
kuroi avatar

kuroi

Totally Zenned

Join Date:
Apr 2006
Location:
London, UK
Posts:
10,475
Plugin Contributions:
11

Re: Magic SEO URL vs Ultimate SEO URL vs SEO_G

cdelab:

I've just install the mod for ZC 1.3.7 and it works fineAs the purpose of this thread is to compare several different SEO mods, we have no idea to which you are referring, and this is not the right place to seek support for a specific mod. It would be better to seek out their specific support threads, or in the case of Magic SEO URLs (the commercial one) approach the vendor.