<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Why You Should Choose Responsive Design Over A Mobile Site	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-responsive-vs-mobile.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-responsive-vs-mobile.html?utm_source=feed&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=feed</link>
	<description>Canada&#039;s Search and Social Media Authority</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2017 01:45:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Jean-Luc Winkler		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-responsive-vs-mobile.html/comment-page-1#comment-828740</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jean-Luc Winkler]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=48436#comment-828740</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nice article on responsive disgn! Of course Google is recommending the less crawl intesive mobile design to save resources on their end. In my opinion the contextual environment of the visitor is also important: Just fitting the same kind of content on a smaller screen leaves a lot of potential behind. How about tailoring the content itself to the situation the visitor is in at the moment? Instead of displaying long articeles they could be summarised when visited from a mobile device that is not connected to wifi etc...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice article on responsive disgn! Of course Google is recommending the less crawl intesive mobile design to save resources on their end. In my opinion the contextual environment of the visitor is also important: Just fitting the same kind of content on a smaller screen leaves a lot of potential behind. How about tailoring the content itself to the situation the visitor is in at the moment? Instead of displaying long articeles they could be summarised when visited from a mobile device that is not connected to wifi etc&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: naeem		</title>
		<link>https://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/125-responsive-vs-mobile.html/comment-page-1#comment-828306</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[naeem]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2014 19:41:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.searchenginepeople.com/?p=48436#comment-828306</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[agreed on the responsive verdict.

Our online store (200 000 visitors a month) for the last 3 years had a mobile site (redirect) while it did work and did the job, it was never as polished and in line with our design.

Earlier this month we revamped our store and went responsive, eliminating the mobile site.  We have seen a significant increase in engagement, time spent and sales/conversions.

More importantly, we&#039;ve see strong growth in the tablet/phablet demographic too.

Over time i&#039;m certain our SEO will get a boost too :)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>agreed on the responsive verdict.</p>
<p>Our online store (200 000 visitors a month) for the last 3 years had a mobile site (redirect) while it did work and did the job, it was never as polished and in line with our design.</p>
<p>Earlier this month we revamped our store and went responsive, eliminating the mobile site.  We have seen a significant increase in engagement, time spent and sales/conversions.</p>
<p>More importantly, we&#8217;ve see strong growth in the tablet/phablet demographic too.</p>
<p>Over time i&#8217;m certain our SEO will get a boost too 🙂</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
