Hi all - I tried to post this right before the server change, and must have gotten caught in the middle... lol. So, here goes again.

I am fairly new to web design (about two years) and am big into doing css layout and navigation. As far as I'm concerned, even though it may take longer to perfect the layout, modifications to content are a lot easier to do than in tables.

But, when I look around at other designers, I see many are still using tables and javascript rollovers instead of css. I assume that this is because it is easier to do this in wysiwyg editors like dreamweaver and the like, and because it is faster? And time is money, etc. Is this the case?

The analogy I gave a friend was a pub burger vs. McD's or BK... both server burgers. The pub will be bigger, healthier, yummier and will take longer to cook and will be more expensive. BK or McD's will be cheaper and faster, but not nearly as tasty. Still, lots of people choose the BK/McD's option every time.

I guess I just want to know WHY people are still using tables instead of css and WHY I, as a designer shouldn't follow suit? Really not trying to be contrary. I'm honestly curious and don't have much of a real life web building community to chat about this with. TIA for your thoughts!

I like your analogy and think it is right.

People are still using tables because they think it is easier, or they just don't believe that using css is better. Once a web designer gets used to laying things out in tables, it is difficult to convert them to CSS. It is almost like trying to convert their religion!

Those that are still using tables for layout fall into a few categories;

1- those too lazy to be bothered to learn CSS, or they're so set in their ways they just refuse to learn anything new

2 - those who have not taken the time to find out WHY they shouldn't be using tables - I run into "but tables display right on all browsers, so why should I bother ?" - actually that's not entirely true because there are some differences.

3 - WYSIWYG users - who have 1 tool and do things 1 way and that's it.
4 - "home" users who only want to build their family site, vanity site, etc. - you can't really expect these people to know any better.

Technically, #3 falls under #1 IMO.

Once table designers actually take the time to learn CSS and have the tenacity to work thru the (IE) bugs, they learn that tables are NOT the best way to do things. The trick is to get them that far. The old adage - 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink' certainly applies.

I have to throw some blame at the schools out there too.. far too many of them are still teaching tables !

use css for what it's meant for (web site layout). use tables for what they are meant for (data display).

Don't ever use tables to create an entire site (that's not what tables are meant for). Hope this clearifies things

I don't think site created with tables are faster to create. If you learn CSS, building a site is much faster and certainly easier and faster to update. If you have a large site, using tables is nuts.

I find it much easier to use a combination of the two. Strict CSS layout can be rather squirrely (with IE6 especially) if you have a complex layout - even using hacks. The amount of time it took to create ONLY CSS pages that work over all platforms far exceeded the amount of time saved when updating the page - at least in my limited experience.

Strict CSS layout can be rather squirrely

No it isn't, we've built over 150 sites using totally table-less sites, STRICT doctype, and there's no squirreliness at all, just nice, clean, code and the sites all work cross-browser.

Don't get me wrong - I use CSS as much as possible - but in some cases it just doesn't seem practical. Sometimes it just takes too much effort and too many hacks to render properly in all browsers (especially IE).

When IE6 goes away I will convert to strict CSS - hopefully that will be soon!

I don't have problems and never use any hacks.

Originally Posted by chrishirst

I don't have problems and never use any hacks.

Same here. I don't find it difficult to use CSS, XHTML Stirct, and work for all browsers. Taking time to learn how to do it right at first will save lots and lots of time later.

For my sites, all the layout and styling are done in three files.

Do any of you mind sharing some shining examples? I would be interested to learn more.

Sure, I just launched this site this morning:
http://www.whitneygonsoulinmd.com

ALL CSS, no tables for layout, XHTML 1.0 STRICT

Works in all the browsers, even IE 6

I converted http://www.dbcconsultancy.co.uk/ from frames and tables a couple of weeks ago.

Not a "shining" example maybe.

I think you'll find most of these are
http://www.oswd.org/

I carnt belive this question is even still being asked come on get with it people tables should be used for tabular data only not whole page layouts, its really not that hard if you think about it .