Anyone following Google's latest May 2022 Core Update?

Some good advice here OP.

Your site's score is atrocious: https://pagespeed.web.dev/report?url....com%2Fhome%2F

Gone are the days of shotgun blasting. Its fine for us.

It seems to be so,

I am wondering if Google will rank mobile versions of a site differently from the desktop version of the same site, and present search results according to the ranking of each - depending on what the surfer is searching with.

Some sites are oriented more to desktop and not to mobile. Even though "Mobile Usability" may be accepted by Google for such sites, the CWV may be considerably better for the desktop.

Do you think a stronger desktop performance might be ignored if the mobile performance is not as good?

My desktop performance is 87. My mobile is 64.

I don't really care about my mobile if my desktop can stand on its own. Does Google weight these separately?

It has been doing for several years now.

Is there a service or a person here who can make these https://pagespeed.web.dev/
metrics for my cam aggregator site go from 56 to like 80-85?

That's good. Then I will focus on my desktop version.

It says under 'Diagnostics' what needs to be done. But feel free to email me and I can take a look

Google is a mobile-first index. However, sites with a bad Desktop score will also see a negative impact as of a few months ago. This is because some sites were making mobile extremely user-friendly, then making desktop cancer with a side of herpes and AIDS.

Sort of, but they're still a mobile-first index. Assuming the same site structure, link profile (etc) on a competitor of yours, the one with the higher mobile score will have the better position on both platforms.

The desktop score really only matters if it's bad. What I mean by that is, if your mobile score is say, 94 but you make Desktop super mega cancer and it's a 58, then you won't fare as well against someone who may also be 94 on mobile, but 99 on desktop.

You should've started caring about mobile experience in about 2012.

Even with CWV as a significant ranking factor, content and relevance still matter, even for "slow" sites.

According to John Mueller’s response from February 26th, 2021, to a question about the influence of Core Web Vitals on search results:

--
"RELEVANCE IS STILL, BY FAR, MUCH MORE IMPORTANT. So just because your website is faster with regards to the Core Web Vitals than some competitor’s doesn’t necessarily mean that, come May, you will jump to position number one in the search results. ...a really fast website might be one that’s completely empty. But that’s not very useful for users. So it’s useful to keep that in mind when it comes to Core Web Vitals."
--

In my view...

There are many reasons why some websites may score less favourably for CWV - not all reasons necessarily being "poor design" or inferior hosting quality.

While there are various "current popular templates" (the new responsive cookie cutter styles), some web designers balance more than just rapid rendering.

There are intentions of distributing processing burden between servers and client machines to reduce server CPU demands.

There are intentions of sharing highly dynamic components of any given page, by deploying them as a series of separate small payloads. This may result in longer aggregate load times, but not anywhere near as much as any adsense-based or nsa/analytics website often involves.

There are intentions of incorporating multi-levelled obfuscation through design to help protect the rendered pages from being easily scraped. This might not stop attempts to scrape content-rich sites, but it makes these attempts clearly visible in server logs and take enough "sniffing" hits to firewall chronic offenders.

And finally, not all websites are in their "final" design/implementation state. While Rapid Application Development may facilitate blasting out massive infrastructures, when something significant like a core update comes along, development priorities may shift to address urgent deficiencies - or not.

The only efforts that seem to make sense until Core Update 2022 is done, and has settled, is to keep creating rich original content.

Maybe so, and Google generally gets what Google wants, regardless of whether its rules make sense, but some web applications do not belong on mobiles.

Google's "reasoning" is based on it's own (advertising) self-interests.

Bucking that may have measurable consequences - or not.

Then you are probably focusing on about one third of your total audience. Mobile users do actually buy porn, especially iPhone and iPad users.

I agree with you that by focusing on Desktop I would forfeit a significant market portion - if (re)selling digital porn was my long-term objective.

The demographic that my work is oriented to developing and harvesting is not limited to digital porn buyers. The largest portion of the prospective market I am working towards primarily uses Desktop.

Yes that is funny thing what is happening now, before was key question how does site look on mobile but now due somuch focus on mobile a lot of sites looks like a joke on desktop. For example, most popular responsive layout on desktop leaves huge empty space on left and right screen and that look really ugly. Which kind a make responsive design fail and old way of having separate desktop and mobile approach much better.

I agree. Forcing desktop design to take second seat to mobile can trash up, what was otherwise, excellent use of visual real estate on large res screens.

My desktop development takes first priority, and has CSS to responsively trim "bonus sections" (left/right of main content).

But that does not seem to be enough for "mobile scores". (Eg. 90 score on desktop / 67 score on mobile.)

If I decide to spend some resources on better mobile presentation, it would be to significantly trim the volume of content that mobile gets, or create a completely static text version for mobile that links to the Desktop version.

I've been looking at Google's spidering behaviour over the past couple days (it's not Googlebot - different agent/IPs, but Google-owned) and it seems to have picked several core pages and every little while it hits the page as a low res device, and then a high res device - repeating this many (many) times for the same page throughout the day.

Also, and I don't know if this is part of the core update, but the actual key phrases I am presently getting impressions for (and higher clicks) are very good and appropriate.

This may be transient, but for now, it seems like the quality of my search traffic is better, even though there are fewer impressions and clicks - I'll take that.