Is switching from a very old HTML table site to HTML5 going to make a big difference

[BobGW]

Hello,

My site owner has been having calls that our old HTML site needs to switch to HTML5. Is it really worth the ubgrade from an archaic HTML site? Please explain.

Bob

[LesleyPaone]

I am imagining the site is not responsive if it is built with tables, so it will at least make a difference in the mobile search results if the site passes the Google mobile friendly test. Google says 50% or more of their search results are delivered through mobile now. If your site is not mobile friendly, it will not be displayed. So in short, it could right off the bat that way.

[ATP]

Hi Bob,

Don't upgrade just because somebody says you need to, consider the variables and then decide if its the right choice for you. Yes its good to be up to date with the latest HTML5 and responsive designs etc but you have to way up cost vs reward.

We faced a similar debate this month after "mobilegeddon", and had to consider the change to a responsive site. After a bunch of calculations we concluded that it would take 7 years on average to earn back the costs of upgrading our website and it would simply not be worth it as our site is performing well in every other aspect.

If your site is still valid HTML, ranking well for its keywords, user friendly, looks modern and up to date then the only consideration really is the "mobile friendly" test which Lesley has detailed. In which case, its just working out if the realistic mobile gains are worth the outlay.

Disclaimer: Im sure some people will totally disagree and argue that a mobile friendly site is an absolute must. Whilst I cannot argue that this is certainly the future I believe each site must be taken individually on its own purpose & merits.

[BobGW]

Lesley,

Thanks!

We have phones and tablets redirected to a mobile friendly version of our site, but just because it says "mobile friendly" in our search results, which I thought meant we're OK, will it still help to have a responsive design?