French PPC

[burnsinternet]

My French traffic and clicks are way up the past two months. From .com to .net, .org, and .info. Anyone else?

Dot coms like Cybercafé.com, laFrançaise.com and leFrançais.com always do well, but are being challenged lately with many dot nets (like Étudiante.net and ModeFemme.net) doing very well. Other extensions (Cosmétiques.org, Vétérinaire.org, UnionEuropéenne.org, Océan.info, etc.) and others are also working out well.

Is it IE7?

[jacksonm]

Originally Posted by burnsinternet

My French traffic and clicks are way up the past two months. From .com to .net, .org, and .info. Anyone else?

Dot coms like Cybercafé.com, laFrançaise.com and leFrançais.com always do well, but are being challenged lately with many dot nets (like Étudiante.net and ModeFemme.net) doing very well. Other extensions (Cosmétiques.org, Vétérinaire.org, UnionEuropéenne.org, Océan.info, etc.) and others are also working out well.

Is it IE7?

Do you have them parked or developed? I get about 10-15 uniques per month on my parked french .coms, but zero clicks.

.

[Rubber Duck]

France it would seem has the hightest IE7 uptake in Europe.

Most other European Nations are going Firefox.

[jacksonm]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Most other European Nations are going Firefox.

Which *really* sucks for IDN traffic.

.

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by jacksonm

Which *really* sucks for IDN traffic.

.

Firefox is an asset rather than a problem.

The biggest problem with Latin IDN is that they are not needed to the same degree.

Most of the serious content was launched on ASCII and many of these sites are struggling to migrate across because they are being "cybersquatted" by IDNs.

There is rarely a good reason for browser to go to Latin IDN sites. The URLs are not easier to type in than ASCII forms even though they might have better brandability.

The French are quite capable of reading words without accents. They never use accents for Capitalisation such as in Newspaper Headlines or on Bill Boards.

Dabsi might mock the Asian IDN crowd, but that is where the real treasures lies.

[jacksonm]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Firefox is an asset rather than a problem.

An asset in that it is able to resolve IDNs.

A problem because by default it only displays the URL with punycode, which also goes to the bookmark. The URL looks ugly, and users wonder if they landed on the correct page. Try selling an IDN to an end-user and explaining to them how you are not trying to scam them when all they see is e.g. xn-w8t.com in the address bar.

A problem because It damned near takes a software engineer to find the info and configure firefox to display IDN URLs.


All things considered, I would just barely consider firefox an asset to the IDN space, because of the punycode policy. And btw, I have been a firefox/mozilla/netscape user exclusively for the past 12 years. I like the software, just not the IDN policy or how difficult they make it to display IDNs.

.

[Rubber Duck]

Before you get too upset this problem only affects Verisign IDN, I believe.

It is a Mozilla/Verisign issue. Yes it is crazy, but if someone type in your IDN it will resolve.

We know people are doing this because we are getting traffic on IDN.com from Firefox browsers. Yes, not ideal, but with Mozilla, I doubt if IE7 would even have been developed for XP, and Microsoft would just have assumed that they had forever to do something about IDN resolution.


Another thing just occurred to me. What is the situation with non-Latin version of Firefox. It may well be they are set up totally differently?

Originally Posted by jacksonm

An asset in that it is able to resolve IDNs.

A problem because by default it only displays the URL with punycode, which also goes to the bookmark. The URL looks ugly, and users wonder if they landed on the correct page. Try selling an IDN to an end-user and explaining to them how you are not trying to scam them when all they see is e.g. xn-w8t.com in the address bar.

A problem because It damned near takes a software engineer to find the info and configure firefox to display IDN URLs.


All things considered, I would just barely consider firefox an asset to the IDN space, because of the punycode policy. And btw, I have been a firefox/mozilla/netscape user exclusively for the past 12 years. I like the software, just not the IDN policy or how difficult they make it to display IDNs.

.

[jacksonm]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Before you get too upset this problem only affects Verisign IDN, I believe.

Firefox refuses to show IDN for nearly all gTLD and some ccTLD by default.

When the "network.IDN_show_punycode" in about:config is false, it means that IDNs will be displayed by default for selected ccTLD, but not for most gTLD.

If there is a whitelist entry for the top-level domain and the entry is set to true, then the IDN is shown as intended. Otherwise, it is shown in punycode. By default, the top-level domains ac, at, br, ch, cl, cn, de, dk, fi, gr, hu, info, io, jp, kr, li, lt, museum, no, se, sh, th, tm, tw, and vn are whitelisted (set to true).
Note: Firefox 1.5 and above only.



Maybe the below should be made into a sticky note/HOWTO in some channel here.


To enable IDN viewing in Firefox (create whitelist entries for gTLD or ccTLDs):

1. type about:config in the address bar <enter>

2. Right-click the mouse in the browser's main window and choose "new" --> "boolean".

3. In the "enter the preference name" box, enter:

network.IDN.whitelist.com (for example, to whitelist .com)

or

network.IDN.whitelist.net (for example, to whitelist .net)

4. In the "enter boolean value" box, select "true" and click OK.

5. Restart firefox.



.

[Olney]

I personally got sick of seeing punycode in my domains using Firefox that's why I started developing my dot jps over coms...

It was just a personal preference but seeing punycode sux...
Good thing most users will use IE7 in the future...

[thegenius1]

Originally Posted by Olney

I personally got sick of seeing punycode in my domains using Firefox that's why I started developing my dot jps over coms...

It was just a personal preference but seeing punycode sux...
Good thing most users will use IE7 in the future...

I pretty much feel the exact same way.

[Rubber Duck]

Yes, but has anyone actually tried looking at how a Chinese or Japanese Language version of the Foxy Browser actually works on a Chinese or Japanese operating systems.

As Phishing is primarily a Latin versus Cyrllic it would totally irrational for them to set Asian Script version of the browser to the same default settings. What has not been established in my view is whether such version behave as the English Language Versions obviously do?

Originally Posted by Olney

I personally got sick of seeing punycode in my domains using Firefox that's why I started developing my dot jps over coms...

It was just a personal preference but seeing punycode sux...
Good thing most users will use IE7 in the future...

I thought you used Safari?

[jacksonm]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Yes, but has anyone actually tried looking at how a Chinese or Japanese Language version of the Foxy Browser actually works on a Chinese or Japanese operating systems.

The user interface language version of the browser and the IDN whitelists are architecturally speaking two seperate things. FF has i18n hooks in the user interface code to enable localization. This has zero to do with the internal logic of IDN whitelisting.

By default, the top-level domains ac, at, br, ch, cl, cn, de, dk, fi, gr, hu, info, io, jp, kr, li, lt, museum, no, se, sh, th, tm, tw, and vn are whitelisted (set to true).

So, asian users (using FF 1.5 or greater) who are looking at asian ccTLDs should see IDNs. The .com, .net, .biz, .info, etc will still show as punycode unless specifically whitelisted.

As Phishing is primarily a Latin versus Cyrllic it would totally irrational for them to set Asian Script version of the browser to the same default settings. What has not been established in my view is whether such version behave as the English Language Versions obviously do?

I say that all versions behave the same with respect to IDN/punycode issues.

Please, a chinese person try the chinese version of firefox to view a chinese IDN.com and report back!

.

[Rubber Duck]

I accept that in principal they are separate bits of architecture, but as different version of Firefox seem to be downloaded from separate sources, it would seem to me there is no fundamental reason why both a foreign language version could not have both bits independently tweaked to give the optimum user experience.

The rather bizarre and twisted arguments we have had to date on phishing have largely eminated from the US who seems to be totally unbothered about the risk faced by browsers from other countries that are constantly obliged to surf the internet in an unfamilar foreign script. Obviously, the English Language versions are going to require ongoing bastardization to placate the xenophobic fraternity.

[mulligan]

I add a javascript "Add to Favourites" or "Bookmark" button to sites so that the unicode is what is automatically in the "Name" field and is what shows up in the bookmark folder ... Not ideal ... punycode is still in the URL bar in firefox but at least people who use the bookmark button know what the hell they are visiting at a later date.

IE is accounting for about 95% of visitors on my Japanese domains

[Rubber Duck]

Well as they say, there is nothing more bizarre than the truth.

Having downloaded and installed a Japanese Version of Firefox, I am able to confirm that it does behave differently.

No, it doesn't show Unicode for dot Com, but it doesn't show Unicode either for Dot JP, which did surprise me. Paste in the Unicode and it reverts to Punycode in the address bar!!!

[Olney]

The non English versions of FireFox treat dot coms, nets, tv, ws etc, the same.
On my Japanese PC desktop it's still in punycode...

[Rubber Duck]

Originally Posted by Olney

The non English versions of FireFox treat dot coms, nets, tv, ws etc, the same.
On my Japanese PC desktop it's still in punycode...

Yes, but is it giving Unicode for dot JP, because my Japanese version of Firefox isn't but perhaps that is because it is on an English OS?

[Olney]

I use 3 computers one English OS PC & One English OS mac, & one Japanese desktop.
All have Firefox & Firefox always displayed dot jps in unicode...

Anyone else getting dot jps displayed as punycode in Firefox?

I haven't used version 1 for a while but I think I remember it being unicode also for jp...

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Yes, but is it giving Unicode for dot JP, because my Japanese version of Firefox isn't but perhaps that is because it is on an English OS?

[Rubber Duck]

Well I am on Downloaded and Installed today Japanese version on English XP, and it is showing Punycode after putting in Unicode for both dot JP and dot CN.

It would seem unlikely that the White List is OS dependant, so I am guessing the White List has been removed.

[jacksonm]

Originally Posted by Rubber Duck

Well I am on Downloaded and Installed today Japanese version on English XP, and it is showing Punycode after putting in Unicode for both dot JP and dot CN.

It would seem unlikely that the White List is OS dependant, so I am guessing the White List has been removed.

What is the version number of the Japanese version you installed?

Look at the configuration like this:

1. in the address bar, type about:config <enter>

2. in the filter bar, type idn <enter>

network.enableIDN should be set to "true"
network.IDN_show_punycode should be set to "false"

You should also see a bunch of entries which start with:

network.IDN.whitelist.*



They really could choose to make this easier for users... Maybe we should write them a letter :-)

.