nomis5 - 10:43 pm on Feb 24, 2013 (gmt 0)
My view, as far as mobiles are concerned, has always been that a separate mobile site (or a sub domain) has always been the best way to go forward if you want desktop and mobile versions of your site.
Problem is what does "best" mean. For me "best" meant the user experience in mobile and desktop. Nothing more and nothing less.
For what it's worth, and your mileage will almost certainly differ, my interpretation of "best" and Google's interpretation differ considerably.
Cutting a long story short, it seems to me that a site utilising responsive design (and in my case a very crude and unappealing one) is more popular to G than two separate sites.
To be absolutely clear where I stand, two (or more) sites are better - each can concentrate more easily on the separate audiences.
But I run a business and unfortunately I need to earn a living in preference to doing the best for my visitors.
The world has gone mad, but I need to face reality so I will also pretend madness to earn my daily bread.
But this is beginning to become a bit sinister, I don't know the exact words but the gist of the quote is "where they burn books today, tomorrow they will burn people".
Seems to me that G, in many ways, is using everyday economics to force some of us to do what we know is not the best for Jo Public.
Your view is .........?