[mjbmedia]

They once said separate mobile sites with a mobile sub domain, then they changed it to having three recommendations, the first seemingly being responsive wed design (RWD).
Google's changing recommendations on SEO for mobile - Smart Insights Digital Marketing Advice

But do the end users prefer that? Is there yet any proof that RWD brings in more profits than separate sites ?
Whilst Google are important, do 'we' place too much emphasis on what they think when just with this one simple point, they are still somewhat undecided and who knows they could change their tune again in six months depending on what they decide they can best monetise.

See here we are telling prospects/clients one thing, then another thing becomes the 'best' and our advice is then incorrect, or is it , who knows, certainly Google don't, only the stats tell the truth and I've yet to see any worthwhile ones showing returns from various mobile site approaches.

I work alongside (JV) a company that deliver websites, SEO, and now RWD sites and I said to them they should be careful about doing just RWD sites when any mobile option is required as they should first consider the aims of the mobile arm of the business and the requirements of the end user now and over the next X years depending on industry served. They quoted me Google saying RWD are the preferred option, I sort of knew they were right but I also sort of know Google are not 'right' , even if the RWD are done in such a way that only the required content for the mobile user is 'downloaded' to the mobile device ie not all the PC based graphics and content, to help speed up the viewing time on the mobile device etc it isn't always the best solution for clients or end users requirements.

[WillR]

Just remember they are only recommendations.

Google isn't the be all and end all.

The person using the site is the most important factor to consider above everything else, I think.

[JohnE]

Originally Posted by WillR

The person using the site is the most important factor to consider above everything else, I think.

Exactly. And that's precisely what made Google as big as it is; their first and only concern has always been: what's best for the individual user?

While there are, and will continue to be, plenty arguments for it, responsive web design, in most cases, does not produce the best looking and/or most user-friendly mobile sites, far from it; a true mobile site version is the best option for the user. And I honestly think that Google, driven by its perpetual need to cater to the individual user, will eventually change its tune once again and switch back to championing separate mobile sites - if, behind the scenes, they haven't already.

[WillR]

Originally Posted by JohnE

Exactly. And that's precisely what made Google as big as it is; their first and only concern has always been: what's best for the individual user?

While there are, and will continue to be, plenty arguments for it, responsive web design, in most cases, does not produce the best looking and/or most user-friendly mobile sites, far from it; a true mobile site version is the best option for the user. And I honestly think that Google, driven by its perpetual need to cater to the individual user, will eventually change its tune once again and switch back to championing separate mobile sites - if, behind the scenes, they haven't already.

I don't even think it's as easy as saying one is better than the other because I think they both have their own uses. For example my own blog uses a responsive design. It makes sense for bigger content type sites such as blogs and news websites, etc, I think. But that's ok as well because the type of mobile users looking up blogs and news aren't in a rush like the people looking for a restaurants phone number. So if those sites are a little slower to load than a standalone mobile site, it's not the end of the world.

But then for small local businesses that only have a few pages and aren't really updating their content all that often, yes, I think a standalone mobile site is a much more sensible solution. It also (generally speaking) means a faster loading site which is perfect for those people searching local businesses as they are generally just after one piece of quick information such as a phone number, map, opening hours, or menu.

[mjbmedia]

See RWD used to be just dump the whole PC site on the mobile device, then it got smarter and could choose what to show, then what got downloaded, now I believe those in the know design an RWD site for mobile first, then tweak it accordingly to suit the PC users .

Now I don't know if that's true or if I wasn't paying attention fully

[RobinInTexas]

Google knows what they are doing, and that is not necessarily what is best for a website owner.

They want to give a searcher what the searcher is looking for.

The website wants to accomplish something, often a sale, once a visitor lands on a site.

If I'm simply looking for information on a particular subject, for many things Wikipedia will give me the best answer.

G knows I'm in the US, so it I search for Zoe Lyons The first listing is the Wikipedia listing for her. #9 is a site offering tickets to upcoming performances in the UK. G guesses correctly that I'm probably not looking to buy tickets for her sold out performance today. Someone in London might have the ticket site closer to the top as they are more likely to be looking for tickets.