JeremyMorgan

I agree with this statement. Rewritten URLs look much better, and as you mentioned, if you use them for navigation you can empower the user even more. Granted the majority of your audience will not likely do this, but it's a really nice bonus for those who do. I will continue to use rewriting, it's not like its a really difficult or time consuming thing to implement.

You should always build your websites with SEO in mind, but don't lose focus of the content. Good content is what drives sites to success, not just SEO.

Your host is just being super cautious. As long as you aren't abusing it, don't worry. If you use their API, and follow their terms and AUP, you'll be just fine, people do it all the time.

submit your sitemap and wait. I've found sitemaps are the best way to get a fast index. You still won't get traffic for a while, but you should be spidered and included within the next week or two.

I wouldn't sweat it. From what I've seen, there is no advantage or disadvantage to using multiple sitemaps. If you have different sources generating the sitemaps, then split them up. It doesn't matter how many pages you submit, its very likely they won't all be spidered at once anyway. I've submitted sites with thousands of pages in their sitemap, and google only indexed 30-40 of them. Google includes pages at it's own pace, and you just have to accept it. As far as the errors don't sweat the false 404s. They'll usually be corrected on the next crawl or two.

Actually, myspace was jumpstarted by the company spamming 3 million people encouraging them to join up, so in a way they were born with a large amount of users. I agree with FilmGod, some companies don't care about SEO because they've reached their tipping point some other way, and don't need to spend resources and money splitting hairs for a bit more SEO traffic. If you are just starting out you may need that kickstart, but focus on building something people will find interesting, not search engines.

There are a few different reasons for using rewritten urls. 1. Cleaner look 2. Easier Navigation 3. Higher Click Thru Rates 4. Better SEO (theory) The primary reason for doing it should be organization, and clean looks. There has been no proof that static urls do better than dynamic ones. In fact, quite frequently I see dynamic urls in top search positions. One obvious benefit when using my-keywords-33.htm rather than id=33 is being able to stuff keywords in the filename. But overall, if it matters in the algorithm, I don't think it matters much. Do what works for you. Remember that using text searches can be much slower on high traffic sites.

I've never heard of Seagull either, but it looks really good. Seagull PHP Framework My suggestion is to make a list of what you desire out of a framework, feature by feature. Then choose the one that best matches your list of needs. Try some sandbox with both of them, and see which one is easier for you to decide on. Obviously with a larger framework like Zend or Cake you have a lot more developers, and more support available. The smaller, less popular frameworks tend to have much less fluff. Keep that in mind if you're only using a few methods to get the job done. Remember you can always mix and match frameworks, and use them side by side. It's not easy but it can be done if you really feel the need.

I just picked up this book and finished it: http://www.phparch.com/c/books/id/9780973862157 It gives you a pretty good overview and should get you started using ZF. It is a very nice package from what I've found.