Does Google really prefer responsive sites?

Does Google really prefer responsive sites?

Despite rumours you may have heard to the contrary, Google prefers responsive design only if your users do, according to Bryson Meunier

This article first appeared in issue 232 of .net magazine – the world's best-selling magazine for web designers and developers.

Believe it or not, Google did not just tell you to make your sites responsive. It seems many people heard that and only that coming out of the iSEO session at SMX Advanced in Seattle on 6 June of this year, but that’s not entirely what they said.

I was on the panel with Pierre Far of Google and Cindy Krum of MobileMoxie and while Google did express a preference for responsive sites, what they ultimately recommended is what they always recommend – to build a site that makes sense for your users. If you determine that responsive design would provide an inferior user experience to mobile URLs or dynamic serving, then they want you to use either of these two other mobile configurations they also support.

Let’s review Google’s guidelines for developing smartphone sites:

  1. Google recommends webmasters follow the industry best practice of using responsive web design, namely serving the same HTML for all devices and using only CSS media queries to decide the rendering on each device.
  2. If responsive design is not the best option to serve your users, Google supports serving your content using different HTML. The different HTML can be on the same URL (a setup called dynamic serving) or on different URLs, and Googlebot can handle both setups appropriately if you follow our setup recommendations.

Notice there are two points. The first says they prefer responsive design. The second that responsive design may not be the best option for your users, and if it’s not, they support two other configurations: dynamic serving and mobile URLs.

To me it seems very clear, but I’m apparently in the minority, as I keep hearing SEO experts and others who think the headlines say that we should make our sites responsive because that’s what Google prefers. This is a problem, as many webmasters are listening to this advice and making their sites responsive because that’s what Google prefers, often regardless of what their users prefer. Most SEOs should understand that any SEO strategy that doesn’t take the user into account is not sustainable (see: Panda, Penguin). If you make your site responsive and it doesn’t fit your user base, your users aren’t going to like it, and neither will Google.

So when might responsive design not be the best option for your users? In their guidelines, Google allows for this possibility, but unfortunately they don’t give webmasters much guidance on when other configurations are more appropriate. One piece of advice they gave us more recently: it’s best not to build responsive sites if the audience you’re trying to reach doesn’t have smartphones. If you want to design your site in a way that will be accessible to smartphone and feature phone users, the only two options available in both Google’s smartphone and feature phone guidelines are dynamic serving and separate URLs. If you look at Google’s recently released guidelines for designing feature phone content you’ll see that responsive web design isn’t an option for mobile SEO for feature phones.

This makes sense, as Opera Mini, which is designed for feature phones, only supports media queries in its current version, and many feature phone browsers don’t support them at all. If you’re designing a site intended for global users or a site intended for an older or less affluent demographic, you probably shouldn’t make it responsive. In short, don’t take sides and listen to dogma, but let the users determine which configuration is best. Sometimes that’s responsive design, and sometimes it’s not.

It’s easy enough to lose that message in an environment where both sides are taking Google’s position and using it to justify their own approach, but it’s an important message to hold on to. Not doing so could not only be bad for your SEO, but bad for your users, and your business.

6 comments

Comment: 1

"Opera Mini, which is designed for feature phones, only supports media queries in its current version, and many feature phone browsers don’t support them at all."

If you design 'mobile first' then this is not a problem.

But otherwise I agree, put the user first and everything will fall into place. 'SEO' needs to go away and die, bunch of snake oil.

Comment: 2

So from this: "One piece of advice they gave us more recently: it’s best not to build responsive sites if the audience you’re trying to reach doesn’t have smartphones."

Doesn't that translate then to, "It's best to build non-responsive sites if you are trying to reach non-smartphone users" or in other words, "Use responsive web design if you are trying to reach smartphones"

I'm confused how you interpreted that as:

"If you want to design your site in a way that will be accessible to smartphone and feature phone users, the only two options available in both Google’s smartphone and feature phone guidelines are dynamic serving and separate URLs."

If you build mobile first, lack of support for media queries isn't an issue in supporting feature phones/smart phones.

Comment: 3

Thanks for the comments, both of you.

mazurka, I think your beef is with spammers rather than SEOs. Unfortunately some of the loudest voices in the SEO industry haven't historically focused on the user, but there are some of us who understand that the only sustainable SEO is user-focused and never have peddled snake oil. The next two Pro Search columns in .Net go into this in more detail.

Both of you make a similar point about mobile first responsive web design, which is well taken. Google doesn't mention mobile first responsive web design in their guidelines, but I imagine that would be a way to make a site accessible for feature phone and smartphone users and acceptable to Google.

It might create a problem for users, however, as Google and others have found that while desktop, tablet and mobile visitors often have similar needs, in certain categories they can be very different. This would pose a challenge for responsive web design in any form, as the content is typically adaptive, and not customized for a user based on their device. While this might be a more efficient, and easier way for us to work, I would argue it might not be the most optimized, depending on what your users want. As a result, it probably won't do as well in search as experiences that address the user's context.

There's also the problem of mobile first in general-- what was recently referred to as the "mobile first fallacy" (http://www.digiday.com/platforms/the-mobile-first-fallacy/)-- when businesses still have most of their users and get most of their revenue from desktop users. Mobile first web design doesn't really address that, but that's bigger than SEO.

Again, though, if you're a publisher and not designing for an audience with different needs on mobile than on desktop or tablet, this approach will probably be fine for users, and for Google.

Comment: 4

I don't think the author of that article about 'mobile first fallacy' know what they are talking about... or at least they don't understand the term 'mobile first' in the context that mazurka and bjankord are talking about (I'm sure it's probably fair that 'mobile first' is used as a buzzword in other contexts).

In the context of building a responsive site, mobile first means that the html and css render a mobile site, regardless of support for media queries etc, so even for a basic browser (like you might find in a feature phone) you should be able to render a decent mobile site. You then use progressive enhancement on top of that to render a more complex desktop/tablet/etc view of the template in browsers that support media queries, and you might do things like lazy load a lot of extra content to keep the mobile site lightweight (which would also allow you to customise the experience for mobile users with quite a lot of depth)

This is why the two commenters are arguing against your point that responsive could not be valid for feature phones

Comment: 5

Thanks, chris974. I'm aware of what the other two commenters were referring to, and I believe I addressed it by saying that mobile first responsive design would be acceptable to Google for feature phones and smartphones. However, it still leaves the issue of a potential user experience problem, if your users are looking for something different on mobile devices than they are on desktops (as many of them are).

Also, with regard to the mobile first article, the author cited businesses such as the Weather Channel that get hordes of mobile traffic and still don't consider themselves mobile first. It's a legitimate concern that businesses have today who don't want to isolate their desktop users (and revenue) at the expense of their mobile users, and it's one of the reasons many (if not most) of them still build separate sites.

Comment: 6

At Trighton Interactive, we fully optimize and develop custom media queries for each screen resolution breakpoint. Our responsive websites look like mobile websites, but they have the advantage of a single code base, one instance of Google Analytics, and are Google highly favors responsive design for SEO.

It would be great if you would read my blog post on the following topic and provide your thoughts. I am taking the totally opposing view as you and in fact have data to substantiate my statement.

Responsive Design Revolution - http://www.trighton.com/responsive-design-revolution/

Best,
Jody
August issue on sale now!

The Week in Web Design

Sign up to our 'Week in Web Design' newsletter!

Hosting Directory
.net digital edition
Treat yourself to our geeky merchandise!
site stat collection