[DELETED]

Overall you want to make sure your site is mobile friendly (google "mobile friendly test"), doesn't try to install malware or the like, is secure (https), doesn't cover main content users want to see (no intrusive interstitials), and is fast. On that last note it's typically images that are the biggest area of needed improvement. The May core web vitals update will probably not be much more than a "tie breaker" according to John Mueller at Google. Hope that helps!

Make your website mobile-friendly and tend to go for low pageload time.

[DELETED]

wow probably i missed smtn , thanks for help also all comment useful.

For page loading speed I think it is enough to be out of RED ZONE. I have seen lots of websites in the yellow zone that rank greatly.

Two free tools:
https://web.dev/measure/
https://developers.google.com/speed/...nsights/?hl=en

[DELETED]

Yes, It is a priority. Your website should be mobile optimized and have a good loading speed to perform better.

there are a few tools from google that helps alot : Google insights , google webmaster
see what wrong and then optimize. Also do UX/UI optimization . Avoid general themes.

[DELETED]

I am using a Wordpress theme that gets rid of all the script bloat and API calls and getting 99/100 for mobile and 100/100 for desktop on page speed insights.

https://developers.google.com/speed/...%2F&tab=mobile

click the link twice to see the results

[DELETED]

Google algorithm wants high page speed on mobile and desktop sites. if you want fully optimize then you can grow your site ranking instantly.

[DELETED]

[DELETED]

Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

There is a couple ways of looking at this... Google, Microsoft, etc actually separate Mobile traffic from desktop traffic. So your site may not be optimized but may rank well on desktop vs "Mobile"

So, where Am I wrong?

Cant say that you are wrong... You ( I am guessing ) built a "Responsive" site so it will be "Mobile Friendly" BUT.. that doesnt mean it actually works well on mobile. having to scroll side to side or important site layouts that use 2 or 3 column layouts and information gets shoved further down the page etc etc starts to decrease mobile usability - and in the end it is USABILITY by the end user that is key.

Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

The reality is, depending on search terms it could be a non optimized site will still list under both conditions.

I don't see how search terms may effect SERP. Please explain.

Terms that have fewer listings - long tail terms specifically ( usually ) Google will implant "Desktop" listings in its mobile listings and visa versa just because there is a lack of quality to select from.

Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

It simply is not as big a deal as many make it.

As I can see no one but G. does it

Actually Bing went to mobile desktop separation long before Google did. And its not just Google anyways.. the separation is all over the internet urls with m.url are very much common - way more common than you would think - just not so common in the i'm at home trying to make a buck building a website portion of the market.

Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

THAT being said... I work primarily with small local business' and as such, because of how the end user is using mobile vs desktop tech it is a better model to create a separate mobile site vs a responsive desktop site. I do optimize the desktop site for tablet and desktop ( responsive to the 2 sizes vs all devices including phones )

You're doing that not because there is real benefit based on fact that our site
uses benefit of both conditions with equal reward.

Not sure exactly what you mean here.. I do it for some very specific reasons. #1 The way a mobile ( phone ) user uses a site is TOTALLY different than how someone on a tablet or laptop or desktop PC uses one. #2 It comes down to navigation and the overall presentation of the information that matches the platform it is being viewed on.

As an example... goto you bank website on your phone and then a PC... same information but 2 totally different sites. Same is true with any of the major retailors Home Depot, Lowes, Walmart, Target, Amazon. These sites ARE NOT using "Responsive" anything - they are directly matching the end use with the site presented. a mobile URL is something like M.insert-site-name-here. Its far more prevalent than you might think

Originally Posted by savidge4 View Post

Doing things to meet the "requirements" of Google etc is one thing, but going a bit deeper and understanding the needs of the end user is something totally different ( UX = Users experience )

Right, and that is why mobile browsers are offering users "desk top" option.

If you really want to get into the specifics here, this option was intended for tablet users because of the larger screen sizes. In terms of UX its a work around to a problem, and not an actual solution.

My objection is, it must be up to individual site owner to chose if mobile version
is necessarily for his or her site without making owners jumping every time G.
comes up with new gimmick.

And here is the issue.. its really not a G issue, its the actual end users that are dictating this. I just so happened to see the writing on the wall a number of years ago, and followed what the big boys were doing - because they have the dollars and tech and man power to determine if that path is worth the effort. And without question it really is, I have gobs of data that suggest a "Mobile Phone" specific site out performs a "responsive" site that is used my mobile phone users.

Forget Google in this discussion, like I said, it was Bing that actually created the initial push Google only reacts to data, more specifically Google reacts to percentage of users.

You are actually arguing a point that the war has already been fought and won. The TRUE industry standard set by online retailors, guys like me that saw the writing on the wall was well in place long before Mobilgeddon. Mobilegeddon wasnt a push by big tech to bully site owners... it was the data of mobile phone users spending more and more time that it was time to set a standard. And lets be real honest here, "Responsive" was a pretty low standard - one that in time, I believe will become more inline with end user use. ( made more specific) Again, the writing is on the wall for everyone to see.

Forget about Google search, what about ease of use of the end user.. the person you are relying on to call and make an appointment or to buy something. does it not make sense to make that process easy?

Chances are way better than good that you interact with Mobile specific versions of sites on a daily basis Facebook? Instagram? ( and I am not talking about the "App" - I mean specifically going to these sites on your phone from the browser ) Think about that for a moments.. if its good enough from "Them" why would it not be something you should be doing to increase sites ability to do whatever it is what it does?

[DELETED]

[DELETED]

[DELETED]

[DELETED]