Jump to content
  • Welcome To Mopar1973Man.Com LLC

    We are a privately owned support forum for the Dodge Ram Cummins Diesels. All information is free to read for everyone. To interact or ask questions you must have a subscription plan to enable all other features beyond reading. Please go over to the Subscription Page and pick out a plan that fits you best. At any time you wish to cancel the subscription please go back over to the Subscription Page and hit the Cancel button and your subscription will be stopped. All subscriptions are auto-renewing. 

Google placements

Recommended Posts

  • Owner

Well the thing is some of this improvement is from the fact older software like Cummins Forum rely on heavy amounts of keywords to make it to the top. I'm relying on simple SEO like Schema.Org, Use of acronyms like VP44 this will be underlined and if you hover it shows the true name. Meeting more of the Today coding requirements that vBulletin 3.x.x can't meet any longer (HTML5, etc.). This is one of the few reason I invested in better software and strive to produce up to date environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think vbulletin 3.8.x is outdated by any means.  You typed in a very specific string of text to show that you were number 1, but I can type in a very specific "mopar1973man" and see you on top as well.  But if I type in "cummins 24 valve forum", which lets face it, thats what this forum specializes in...we aren't even on the first 5 pages, but looky there, old outdated vbulletin gives cumminsforum the #1 spot.  


Then there is the standard.  The forum works....you can't say it doesn't when I can go there and post something just as easy and seamlessly as anywhere else.  It doesn't have a mobile version, but thats what tapatalk is for, which made everything completely seamless on the mobile side as well.  Tapatalk is commonplace so it isn't a burden on anyone when everyone just has it out of necessity.  So be it HTML4 or this or that, where is the proof that it isn't working?  Obviously google finds it just as easily.


Then we have the pic I attached.  Windows 7 is 5 years old, Windows XP is 13 and not even supported by microsoft anymore.  So do you keep up with the 18% of people who actually are on the latest Linux/Mac/Windows 8[.1], or do you keep an old standard that 82% of people use..  


Now I'm not saying innovation is bad, obviously this forum works and pretty slick at that.  But you can't call vBulletin old and outdated when that is exactly what the majority of people are still using.  So in that essence, they are current.  Newer stuff is backwards compatible anyways.  


Cumminsforum works, dieseltrucksite works, and same with the other 82% (im guessing) of other forums still using vBulletin 3.  


You need to upgrade IF it makes things smoother/better for people as a whole, not to keep up with the jones'.  If a newer format doesn't work with 82% of people, then its useless.  Luckily the browsers are updating to cope with newer protocols.  But if people are still on XP and don't update and still use IE, will their computer even understand HTML 5?  Statistics show that 58% of people are still using the piece of crap..  


So thats just some food for thought.  This forum works fine....I'm just saying don't upgrade to stay current like you seem to keep doing, upgrade only if there is actually a benefit.  Don't get lost in the trees of the forest.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Owner

That's the thing vB3 doesn't even support mobile anything. vB4 barely supported but never worked properly.


As for Google rating part of it is the URL and the title string. Now if I had a URL with Cummins in it I bet it would improve too. But still in all the software of some of these site are not going to meet browser requirements (HTML5). Then server software (MySQL and PHP) things are changing rapidly. Last vB3 is good for is PHP5.4 which was a hack job.


Current PHP



Current MySQL






Here is CF's header.

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr" lang="en">

Sorry, But the technology is old. Just like Windows XP it might still work but its old.

XHTML 1.0 became a World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Recommendation on January 26, 2000.


Take a peek at coding changes...



Like I know M73M uses acronym and a few older commands but that another reason I'm patiently waiting for the IPB 4.x.x and watch its release. I've already went over most of the site looking at the code and there is several thing it not passing the grade for current HTML5 standards. But resolving as much as I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Create New...