So after Google suggested you should do your m-dot migration to responsive before the mobile first index, SEOs had some questions. They wanted more information on when this mobile-first index was launching because it is a big job to do this m-dot transfers.
John said on Twitter, no timeline but you should do the migration anyway. Why? John said "the mobile pages should be fully equivalent in content & functionality regardless of indexing." Adding that if that is not the case now, then you will be fixing something. "Why wait to fix that," he added.
Well, some people would not call that a "fix" but less and more focused content and features on mobile is designed for better user experience.
SEOs also blasted back that while moving one site from m-dot to responsive is technically easy but massive enterprises that have 350 CMSs all with their own quirks, that is not easy. So prioritizing here is important and timelines are also important.
Here are some of those tweets:
The mobile pages should be fully equivalent in content & functionality regardless of indexing, right? Why wait to fix that? Users care too.
— John ☆.o(≧▽≦)o.☆ (@JohnMu) June 19, 2017
If you go through a site migration, change platforms, managing ~350 sites, there is more involved than just a switch!
— Dennis Goedegebuure (@TheNextCorner) June 19, 2017
That would REALLY help SEO’s at enterprise level!
— Dennis Goedegebuure (@TheNextCorner) June 19, 2017
Prioritization of product resources are always timely, hence would be best for Google to be more specific on timing
— Dennis Goedegebuure (@TheNextCorner) June 19, 2017
I hear you! But if you have 350 sites that are "bad on mobile," that seems like a problem regardless of what Google does.
— John ☆.o(≧▽≦)o.☆ (@JohnMu) June 20, 2017
Oh, that sounds much better, whew! :) M.-sites can be totally fine with the mobile-first index. Responsive is not required.
— John ☆.o(≧▽≦)o.☆ (@JohnMu) June 20, 2017
Fair point.
Forum discussion at Twitter.
