CSS Layout or Table layout

The big boys use tables

[Matt Probert]

I appreciate this is a contentious issue, but all the most popular and successful web sites: Yahoo, Google, eBay, Fastclick, CNN, use tables for layout. While purists argue that one should use CSS for layout. I wonder if CSS in terms of layout is not perhaps a white elephant.

Matt

[jetboy_70]

Sounds like a troll to me, and to be honest this has been discussed so many times in the last few months it's getting a bit tired.

Yahoo Search, Chevrolet, Amnesty International, VH1 and many more have been rebuilt utilising CSS and web standards over the last year, and the trend will continue.

However, if you're looking at big sites to take the lead towards CSS layouts you're looking in the wrong place. While there are many benefits to using CSS, few have an immediate impact on profitability, so an expensive redesign *solely* for the sake of using CSS is a difficult case to argue.

[createErrorMsg]

Google, eBay, Fastclick, CNN

One thing you'll notice about ALL of these 'big name' web sites is that none of them need to show up on a SE results page in order to get traffic. The power of their size, popularity, and branding has rendered them a household name; many of them are the places people turn to in order to find other sites on the net. Google could care less where it ranks in it's own search index, see?

If you have a site with that kind of strength coming out of the gate, certainly the question of css-p vs tables is somewhat moot. You can probably afford to deliver a slower, clunkier page to your users. But if you're not already a big name, with big draw, you need to consider every advantage you can get your hands on. And CSS-P is one of them. Faster download times, source ordered code, accessibility, blah blah blah.

Yahoo

Actually, Yahoo recently redesigned their site in css-p. And it's a MUCH better page for it. Cleaner, faster, less cluttered, easier to use, etc.

[wingslevel]

The Yahoo css-p looks cool. Couldn't lots of whats in their source have been moved to the css file? Is this a way for them to maintain backward browser compatibility?

[encyclo]

Couldn't lots of whats in their source have been moved to the css file?

If you're looking at the yahoo.com home page, the CSS is inline becasue they are not reusing the CSS rules anywhere else on their site. Putting the rules inline reduces the number of calls to the server, as everything is in one file (and as their home page is extremely busy, that will make a significant impact). There would also be a slight increase in load speed for the end user who doesn't have to wait for an external file to be requested and downloaded.

[illtron]

Popular does not equal best or right. Do you think that Wal-Mart sells all the best stuff because it's popular and successful? By similar logic, Wal-Mart must be a great place to work because they're such a large employer. Internet Explorer must also be the best browser. It's a ridiculous argument.

[ronin]

Google could care less where it ranks in it's own search index

Arguably, it couldn't care less.
But the point is well made that companies which don't rely on SE referrals certainly won't adopt CSS for the benefits of spider-friendliness.

Large companies also suffer from organisational inertia. A site run by three people or one person can green light a redesign and have it done in days. A large company will have divisions arguing for weeks if not months over the best way to redesign or whether to redesign at all.

[createErrorMsg]

Google could care less.

Ahh, the embarrasment of the typo. Do forgive. :)