new gtlds This $20 billion company uses a new TLD for its website, and…

[News]

What’s surprising is that it seems to be basing its business on a .technology domain name. As the listener pointed out, DXC.com now forwards to DXC.technology.

So a $20 billion company is using DXC.technology, paid a big sum for DXC.com, and doesn’t own DXC.tech!

Now, the merger just went through so the company’s branding and domain choice might be in flux. But based on the logo (pictured) the company seems to be embracing .technology...

Read More

 

[Domain Galleria]

Perhaps, some will but the ones with at least 3 digit IQ's will go to Google do a search cos clearly they are on the wrong page

You sure know very few will have the time to search them out except they don't have competitors

 

[Domain Galleria]

why didn't you register technologytechnologytechnologytechnology....technology?

LOL

 

[rafass]

So, what's wrong if big companies start to use new tds?

 

[frostify]

Gotta love how close dxc are on the keyboard

 

[DOMAIN ILLUMINATI]

So, what's wrong if big companies start to use new tld's?

Nothing wrong - at least not for the big company with the new TLD itself hahaha
It just turns the world of some / many domainers upside down.

 

[ProDomanico]

For some companies .Technology is more focused towards their offering and they seem to be more inclined towards it

 

[dumindu89]

Few months ago, I couldn't find other than nic.apple in Google search results.
Now there are store.apple as well as icloud.apple in Google search results. It seems even a $200 billion company started backtesting their nTLD.
A red flag for nTLD bashers.

 

[Wass]

NGTLD

Few months ago, I couldn't find other than nic.apple in Google search results.
Now there are store.apple as well as icloud.apple in Google search results. It seems even a $200 billion company started backtesting their nTLD.
A red flag for nTLD bashers.

Apple is not a $200 billion company but a $740 billion company.
And yes, nGTLD bashers are in BIG TROUBLE.

 

[Wass]

Playstation for their blog for now they are still using the .com (they redirect the .blog to the .com) but if you go to the playstation blog you see at the top of the page: Playstation.Blog

 

[Kate]

Few months ago, I couldn't find other than nic.apple in Google search results.

nic.apple redirects to https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/tld/ for me. Not even a standalone site.

Now there are store.apple as well as icloud.apple in Google search results. It seems even a $200 billion company started backtesting their nTLD.
A red flag for nTLD bashers.

These names are not resolving. The Apple whois at http://whois.nic.apple/ returns not found for both names. They simply do not exist. You probably misread the search results.

 

[dordomai]

nic.apple redirects to https://www.apple.com/legal/intellectual-property/tld/ for me. Not even a standalone site.


These names are not resolving. The Apple whois at http://whois.nic.apple/ returns not found for both names. They simply do not exist. You probably misread the search results.

they show up in search if you enter them but there is no content indexed. If they do no exist in whois that might mean they previously existed or maybe Google shows them because someone linked to them or tried to access them not because they exist. whatever that means I do not think showing names that don't show in zone or whois is proof that a company prepares to use them or backtests them. That is an example of wishful thinking and highlights the current sad state of .brand. There is so little happening even after 3 years that one needs to resort to make up things to make the future seem brighter than it currently looks.

I understand that people realise(d) that without large tech brands going forward there is little chance of adaption but that is not excuse to make things up.

a company like Apple doesn't need several years to backtest their site that is BS.

 

[dumindu89]

They simply do not exist. You probably misread the search results.

You can't hide the truth by telling these kind of ridiculous points. Apple has already created those links. That's why they are showing in the results. store.apple link has a topic "Click to Activate" too which proves there was content in the subdomain earlier. Google bot not is a dumb bot to index links which are not exist earlier.

 

[dordomai]

A $200 billion company bought shoes.com for $9 million instead of using shoes.walmart

I wonder why?

 

[Kate]

they show up in search if you enter them but there is no content indexed. If they do no exist in whois that might mean they previously existed or maybe Google shows them because someone linked to them or tried to access them not because they exist.

I was able to see the results in Google with this query:

site:*.apple

So these two names previously existed but were removed. Apple must have been testing things (very modestly).
I think you can apply for access to their zone file through CZDS and see if more domains are registered.
But if there was any other active website under the .apple TLD, Google would have indexed it, since they certainly get all the zone files that they can for discovery purposes.

Apparently few corpTLDs are currently being used for any meaningful purpose. Almost as if the companies wanted to secure their TLD like they do defensive registrations for domain names. Doesn't mean that they have any immediate plans to use them. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

 

[dordomai]

I was able to see the results in Google with this query:

site:*.apple

So these two names previously existed but were removed. Apple must have been testing things (very modestly).
I think you can apply for access to their zone file through CZDS and see if more domains are registered.
But if there was any other active website under the .apple TLD, Google would have indexed it, since they certainly get all the zone files that they can for discovery purposes.

Apparently few corpTLDs are currently being used for any meaningful purpose. Almost as if the companies wanted to secure their TLD like they do defensive registrations for domain names. Doesn't mean that they have any immediate plans to use them. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

you can do the same with .facebook, .microsoft etc.

Microsoft have a few registered but they all redirect to the .com, example office.microsoft

 

[dumindu89]

A $200 billion company bought shoes.com for $9 million instead of using shoes.walmart

I wonder why?

It's simply a smart buy. It's not just the domain. Shoes.com is a well known brand. Bankruptcy of the business will reduce the value of the brand name a bit. But $9M is nothing to a $400B company.

 

[dumindu89]

That is an example of wishful thinking and highlights the current sad state of .brand. There is so little happening even after 3 years that one needs to resort to make up things to make the future seem brighter than it currently looks.

Even after 3 years? .Apple delegated in 3rd Nov 2015. That means it's less than 1 year and 6 months to date. Do the math first.

 

[dordomai]

Even after 3 years? .Apple delegated in 3rd Nov 2015. That means it's less than 1 year and 6 months to date. Do the math first.

what about the others? I was speaking of .brand in general not just this one.

 

[Kate]

The registry agreement was made on 14 May 2015. And they could actually have prepared a little something before the TLD even went live.
Corporations are not in a hurry to use their new extensions, which is a bad thing for gTLD investors yearning for exposure.
nic.microsoft is as developed as Apple, that is one page and a few links.

 

[MapleDots]

Gotta love how close dxc are on the keyboard

For no other reason I would keep dxc.

I would then advertise......

Get ready for it......

Easiest domain to enter at night while eating chips without a backlit keyboard.

 

[deez007]

For no other reason I would keep dxc.

I would then advertise......

Get ready for it......

Easiest domain to enter at night while eating chips without a backlit keyboard.

Lol....seeing as it is 1 handed keyboard friendly, I would imagine it could also be the perfect name for an adult site

 

[dumindu89]

what about the others? I was speaking of .brand in general not just this one.

There is a huge difference between 3 years and 1.5 years. Don't try to generalize them.

According to my quick search Axa, Kred, Mango, Monash and Neustar corpTLDs are belong to your 3 years category. 4 out of 5 them already using their corpTLD for commercial purposes except one. 1 out of 5 fully migrated to the corpTLD. 5 out 5 corpTLDs passed DNS test. So they didn't give up their .brand even after 3 years even it cost a considerable annual cost.

 

[dordomai]

There is a huge difference between 3 years and 1.5 years. Don't try to generalize them.

According to my quick search Axa, Kred, Mango, Monash and Neustar corpTLDs are belong to your 3 years category. 4 out of 5 them already using their corpTLD for commercial purposes except one. 1 out of 5 fully migrated to the corpTLD. 5 out 5 corpTLDs passed DNS test. So they didn't give up their .brand even after 3 years even it cost a considerable annual cost.

why are you avoiding the fact that the majority of the earlier launched extensions didn't switch?

it is not a question of time, they simply don't want to. wait one year and the situation will be (predictably) the same.

 

[dumindu89]

why are you avoiding the fact that the majority of the earlier launched extensions didn't switch?

it is not a question of time, they simply don't want to. wait one year and the situation will be (predictably) the same.

I have a question. When did .Technology extension delegate and when did DXC move to their nTLD? What is the duration between the switch?

 

[dordomai]

I have a question. When did .Technology extension delegate and when did DXC move to their nTLD? What is the duration between the switch?

.technology is not .brand, their own nTLD would be .dxc