#29 No Tables. How does that help performance? Sure on very large pages that might help, since the table usually won't render until the </table> has been sent

#29 No Tables. How does that help performance? Sure on very large pages that might help, since the table usually won't render until the </table> has been sent, but maybe the better tip would be "avoid very large pages" (i.e. 100KB or more of HTML). DIV based layout also degrade if text in a single cell is very large, whereas Table based layout is robust against that. Also, I don't understand why <TABLE> is bad, but this is okay!?!?! <div class='table'> <div class='tr'> <div class='td'>1</div><div class='td'>2</div><div class='td'>3</div> </div> <div class='tr'> <div class='td'>a</div><div class='td'>b</div><div class='td'>c</div> </div> </div> Which is what DIV/FLOAT layout usually ends up becoming. If your DIV/FLOAT layout doesn't map to a structure like that, you're probably doing something wrong! Finally, has IE fixed the "we double the padding on floats" issue? Because float-driven layout with that bug is pretty hard, since IE will double your paddings while the other browsers don't. I do know that proudly espousing TABLE in a job interview can cost you the job. But aside from that TABLE is very effective for most layouts. I do avoid TABLE inside TABLE of course, that's a code smell, but top level TABLE is the right tool most of the time. Do anti-TABLE people also avoid Excel?