Okay, so it was probably pretty obvious — out of Zara, Uniqlo, Primark, H&M, and Cotton On, the only responsive site was Cotton On’s. We’re aware that most people aren’t going to using narrow browser windows in a desktop environment, so it’s not necessarily a huge deal that four out of the five brands don’t have responsive sites (they have perfectly usable separate mobile sites, as can be seen in the screenshots above). But there are still a few big reasons why it wouldn’t be a bad idea for them to make the switch to responsive.
Single code base: If your site is responsive, you won’t have to worry about managing two separate code bases (one for your desktop site, and one for your mobile site). As a result, maintaining and updating your site should take less time and money.
Omnichannel: Such an overused buzzword, but since we’re acknowledging that right off the bat, hopefully that gives us permission to use it. The reality is that a responsive site ensures the most seamless connection between desktop and mobile for customers.
Google recommends it: We’ve been talking about the importance of mobile commerce a lot lately, and we’ve also repeatedly mentioned the fact that Google recommends responsive design. Although they don’t favor responsive sites over separate-URL mobile sites, it’s still probably a good idea to follow the search giant’s recommendations.
We recognize that no two brands are the same, and no two websites are the same. Sometimes, you might need some unique functionality to be present for only the mobile experience, in which case a responsive site with a single code base might just not be possible.