Ask HN: Is a .NET Domain Bad? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is a .NET Domain Bad?

2 pointsherodoturtle6 comments

At the SaaS company where I work we're having a fierce internal debate on .com versus .net and whether our using a .net domain is a hindrance.

FWIW, the .com version of our domain is in a completely different field, and so there's zero risk of confusion between the two domains.

View on HN

There's nothing wrong with using the .net version of your choice. You'll get some slack from internet old timers who will quote to you how the .net extension was originally created to identify areas of the internet that dealt with the networking functions of the internet. That was the past, now its use is open to what ever you want. From the start .com has been the extension that ID's the commercial part of the internet so it's the most popular extension. WWW and .com are the 2 parts of a web address that are burnt into people's minds so that's why it's so popular.

If I couldn't get a .com I would probably aim for something other than .net maybe, .io or .co. But that's me.

I will also tell you that if I don't remember the other than .com extension, I will try .net or .org. So, .net is not a bad choice, if that's all you can get. That also speaks to a problem. If your site becomes very popular then people will use the .com or .org to troll you or to take advantage of the traffic your .net generates. For years whitehouse.com was a porn site. The owners were taking advantage of the traffic the .gov version generated. That went on for a long time, I don't know why it took so long to change it. I wonder how many kids got trapped in that situation?

For most businesses, a .com domain is the clear best choice.

For specific countries, having a country code TLD as well can avoid confusion (is it .com or .co.uk? Both/either!) and increase confidence of local support and/or regulatory compliance.

.io can work for API-based service businesses, or (oddly) games.

.net can work for ISPs, Telcos, etc, although generally again in tandem with the .com.

The rest of the TLD explosion is basically a scam, predicated on companies buying the MyCo.<whatever> domain to try to avoid customer confusion, trademark dilution, negative publicity, etc.

Just spend the money on the .com if you have to, or make sure you pick a company name that has an available .com and social media accounts. It's easily worth it to lock in the right name.

FWIW I always choose .NET over .COM for any domains I register for my [as opposed to client] projects. I prefer it. It's cheap. It rolls off the tongue nicely. It's one of the original [so trustworthy/familiar sounding] TLDs, and I think it sounds more 'internetty'.

Maybe the situation is different in the US. But, here in Europe, we have a load of separate TLDs. So I don't think there's the same instinct that a domain name that doesn't end in .COM is in any way 'inferior' or 2nd choice.

The only possible hindrance I can think of is that if you build something on .net but someone else manages to score the .com for that name then you may have future troubles.

But since your company owns the both versions then that stands settled.

Just out of curiosity, won't users be confused if you have 2 products for different fields sharing same names one on .com and another on .net?

Can anyone actually articulate and provide any research/evidence for the "using a .net domain is a hindrance" side?

If you can get both, get both.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com