What is better to use? "div" or "tables"

Hi all,

Im new here and I would like to know some doubts that I have. I observer that some websites are using "div" and other "tables".

What is the difference between those 2? What do I get or what results, if I use "div" or "tables" in my website.

To be honest, before I was using "tables" in my header and footer templates, and my site had a score of 95% SEO in whois.domaintools.com

But after I switched all things to "div", now my score had lowered to 85%, is that posible and could had been because of the changing code?

Some friends told me that using "div" is better for a fastest speed of the website...

I would like to hear some professional opinions.
Thanks alot to all,

 

div for layout, table for data =]

 

I prefer <table ...>

 

sure div...

 

tables are for lazy people haha

 

The real difference between tables and divs is basic HTML vs. CSS. CSS is a way to add formatting to many different parts of your site and control it all in one file, in comparison with a table which tends to have styling attributes added individually to each table. CSS is a very good way of standardizing your styling in one file. With one line change you can update an entire look of your site. It allows for an easier way to edit the user interface of your site. Also, using divs ends up being a lot easier to read than tables. The problem with tables is when they nest they have extra components. Look at the example below.

<table>
 <tr>
  <td>
   <table background="blue" color="white" width="50%">
    <tr>
     <td align="center">Box 1</td>
     <td align="center">Box 2</td>
    </tr>
   </table>
  </td>
 </tr>
 <tr>
  <td>
   <table background="black" color="white" width="50%">
    <tr>
     <td align="center">Box 1</td>
     <td align="center">Box 2</td>
    </tr>
   </table>
  </td>
 </tr>
</table>

Code (markup):

Now compare this with a way of doing it using CSS.

HTML file

<div id="layoutHolder">
 <div id="blueBox">
  <div class="leftBox">Box 1</div>
  <div class="rightBox">Box 2</div>
 </div>

 <div id="blackBox">
  <div class="leftBox">Box 1</div>
  <div class="rightBox">Box 2</div>
 </div>
</div>

Code (markup):

CSS

#layoutHolder
{
 width:100%;
 float:left;
 color:white;
}

#blueBox
{
 width:50%;
 background:blue;
 float:left;
}

#blackBox
{
 width:50%;
 background:black;
 float:left;
}

.leftBox
{
 width:50%;
 text-align:center;
}

.rightBox
{
 width:50%;
 text-align:center;
}

Code (markup):

Notice the hierarchy to the system. If I decided now that I wanted all of the contents in class rightBox to align right I can change one line like below.

.rightBox
{
 width:50%;
 text-align:[b]right[/b];
}

Code (markup):

As you can see, it is VERY powerful. You can use this throughout a site and easily format. If you have any other questions, feel free to PM me or checkout the CSS section of the form.

 

I would go with divs as they can be placed anywhere on the page and if used right can have great impression.

 

Divs. Simple and plain. They are actually easier to use in my opinion also.

 

I've always used divs myself, i only use tables for data. CSS is so powerfull and much faster than using tables.

Hannah

 

Divs with CSS.

If your not using Divs styled with CSS your missing out on a lot.

Using a table inside a table inside a table really isn't a good way to go.

Divs/CSS is:

- better for SEO (> content over code ratio)
- faster loading (less code)
- browser friendly
- easier to edit (control your websites design/style from 1 file)
- 2009 not 2000

 

Divs make the loading time slower, and are used more nowadays

 

Tables are better to use if you are making a site with the purpose of SEO and if you don't think about SEO and about the search engine ranking DIV is The best.

 

Agree. Tables for layouts are maintenance nightmares.

 

Tables ARE NOT better for SEO because there is much more code. So this means it's harder for Google to crawl your content. Someone said divs are slower but there much faster than tables once again due to less code..

 

Agreed. Tables are NOT good for SEO. Tables are for tabulated data. A good example of something that would be put in a table is a z-index chart (example).

 

A simple table shouldn't affect SEO either way. While it would make me a happier person, the SE's don't currently know code from jack. They read the content for the most part, with some ability with microformats and things like header tags. But go ahead and dump a bunch of highly-sought-after info inside a big td and the googles wouldn't know the difference. Niet een slimme bot.

Esp since people often mix tables with more semantic tags inside. I actually see more tables like this (div-based code for headers, footers and sidebars, a huge freaking table in the middle for the main content for some unknown reason) than completely-tabled pages with no other types of tags.

(don't anyone construe the above as being pro tables-for-layout, it's not)

 

The issue is not tables vs divs. The real issue is whether you want well structured, semantic markup, or not. No non-trivial table layout can be well structured, and people who use table based layout tend not to know or understand semantic markup.

cheers,

gary

 

I can't say for sure that divs are better than tables but divs add much more flexibility which is nice.
Secondly if you compare the code of a site which uses divs with all the codes saved in an external css file compared to a table site which no external css file, you will notice what how much lighter the actual page is.

Making the evaluation of the page easier. Which Google probably adovocates, saves storage space and bandwidth = more money for Google.

 

I am also with DIV

 

Are you an idiot?