Stupid! I have taken this very page your
are reading, stripped it of the <table> tags
and replaced them with <div> tags
and it went from 51kB to 31kB.
they forget that this particular page isn't
really a page connected to a DATABASE, hence
it doesn't use tabular data.
Nevertheless, if you take
a close look at their resulting CSS only
page of their page, it doesn't include
all those CSS workarounds, and
those additional workarounds
for those workarounds to get it all the buttons
to be in the right position or the border
or lines. And that just for a single browser
IE. They forget that this page using tables
looks pretty much the same in Mozilla, Netscape,
forget to add in the additional CSS page
weight to their 31k, and that's not including
the original CSS page they have to add. This
can jump easily to 41k and that's without
the workarounds that need to added for it
to look the same.
So by the time they got everything to look
exactly like this page it will end up being
same size anyway!
Yep, let's do the R.O.I. and see if one can
really pay less for bandwidth. ISP's give
you so much bandwidth per month anyway. Very
few sites use more than 10-20%
of the maximum monthly bandwidth allocation.
And most of these CSS elitist web designer's
websites hardly get any web traffic anyway!
Plus, they don't even have a lot pages to
view in the first place
This is possibly because they
don't have anything worth storing and organizing
in a database, nor
the skills or desire to work with a database.
How ironic isn't it? These same CSS elitists
find the time to criticize those
who don't use
to learn a new tool, yet come right back
around and are not willing to learn the database
programming stuff that makes the most treasured
valued content of high traffic websites.