How about the argument:

It takes longer to build a layout with tables than it does to build one without tables, if done by a professional who knows what he or she is doing. Because I'm willing to bet, giving a design of any decent complexity, me, or LadynRed, or serandfae could smoke any of you table people in creating almost any single page.

Plus, if you CSS skills are not good, you're leaving out whole realms of possibilities from your skillset, such as becoming good at jQuery, or another JavaScript library which uses heavy CSS selectors to activate the document. Add that to the fact that core client side JavaScript language itelf is becoming more oriented towards CSS (querySelectorAll), and if you are still unskilled enough to not be able to handle something as simple as not using tables for laying out a web-page... I mean come on. For chrissake, there are people acting as if this is some sort of advanced science. We aren't building a space-station: tableless design is not that hard.

Don't even get me started on Jquery or Javascript. Talk about Browser related issues!

I code what used to be referred to as "green" code and probably still is in some circles.

1. Minimal use of pictures and graphics.
2. Virtually no use of any form of scripting.
3. No flash or other bandwidth hooging add-ons.

I also do not take customers who want this stuff.

I have made one and only one exception recently. I am now working with
PHP and My SQL because of one customer.

I can make my way through most Javascripts and CGI scripts.
But only as a fact of knowledge for my portfolio.

Keep it plain and simple. It will work EVERYWHERE.

Originally Posted by marketingman100

Don't even get me started on Jquery or Javascript. Talk about Browser related issues!

All that statement means to me is that you don't know what you are talking about. JavaScript does have its share of browser-related quirks and compatibility issues, but the are not as marked as CSS issues. Core JavaScript is almost exactly the same on all clients.

As far as jQuery is concerned, browser compatibility issues are almost non-existent. It is because of libraries like jQuery that front-end engineers can quickly and easily work over a variety of browsers without needing to refer to compatibility tables.

Keep it simple, sure, but elegance is a requirement of any design worth it's salt. Clients that are marketing $10 million dollar + apartment buildings to landlords aren't going to want nothing when they pay for their website, and the customers they are marketing to aren't going to be on dial-up. This is the kind of people I build websites for.

CSS sites load faster than table-based sites anyway. External style rules are cached by the browser, which means all that needs to be served on each page is some minimal markup, images, and a script or two that is also probably cached.

Yeah, CSS sites load faster IF they don't blow up the browser first.
Functionality and conveying the message are the key issues.

Not bloating the bandwidth with elegance and style.

Nothing irks me more than to have to sit and wait for a bunch of Flash BS.

It's the INFORMATION Superhighway.
FAR too many of you designers have forgotten that.

Originally Posted by marketingman100

Yeah, CSS sites load faster IF they don't blow up the browser first.
Functionality and conveying the message are the key issues.

Not bloating the bandwidth with elegance and style.

Nothing irks me more than to have to sit and wait for a bunch of Flash BS.

It's the INFORMATION Superhighway.
FAR too many of you designers have forgotten that.

I will give it to you that usability and delivering content is key. However, it needs to be realized that website designing is an art. Sometimes a very minimalistic site works just fine. many times, though, you want your website to look good to convey a level of professionalism.

Many respectable websites are "bloating the bandwidth with elegance and style" such as facebook, youtube, twitter, yahoo, and almost any other big-name website you'll find.

Also, sure, flash websites are annoying, I totally agree with you on that. But if used correctly, flash can give a website an edgy and interactive feel.

Don't blame bad web design on CSS and browser technologies like flash. They can create a slick website. The key is to use them correctly.

Go ahead, use your tables. They're compatable across most browsers, and they just work. But don't go slinging mud on Web 2.0 technologies. They work pretty much just as well, if they're in the hands of a good developer, and you can create a more interactive, user-friendly experience. Like it or not, the future is here, and it's CSS, div's, flash, and javascript. Tables still work fine, but IMO they're inferior to these new technologies.

Hi, please answer,
dose using too much tables on a page affect your google rak and adsense ads? i meas is it hard for google bot to crwal/read text iside tables that are made inside other tables?

Originally Posted by thefandango

It is not a tired agguement. CSS iss not consistent and you need HACKS - seriously I cant understand how any intelligent person would be claiming a system that required "hacks" was better than employing a tabled layout!

Normally I can build most websites with less than 10 lines of code needed to get the thing going in IE6 & 7.

I don't see that as a problem. And, when it comes to making design changes, I'd certainly rather just have to edit one or two stylesheets than go through editing tables on every single page.

Originally Posted by wayfarer07

The reason I find that backwards, is that it is much easier for me to build first for Firefox, because of the Firebug extension. Every browser has slight differences, even a few inconsistencies between Firefox and Chrome or Safari, for example, but I don't have a better tool for making live editing inside of a real browser than Firebug. IE8 (which has IE7 built into it), does have the new Developer's tools, which comes close, but it's still not as good to me.

Yes it's definitely backward, but I really do find this way I need far fewer hacks for some reason. It's just easier to adapt code that works in IE to Firefox.

Originally Posted by darfun

Hi, please answer,
dose using too much tables on a page affect your google rak and adsense ads? i meas is it hard for google bot to crwal/read text iside tables that are made inside other tables?

I'd like to say yes, but Google doesn't actually care one bit how your site's code is structured. It can be more difficult to optimize table-based layouts because there is more code to wade through, but that is about it.