|
|
Posted by Martin Jay on 05/26/06 23:05
In message <1148654926.962797.266830@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, The
alMIGHTY N <natlee75@yahoo.com> writes
>We are redesigning our website and my manager and I engaged in a debate
>which included, among other things, whether to stick with tables for
>structuring the website or use more DIV tags. I'm a proponent of doing
>what works for the particular case, but I was interested in finding out
>more about something he said. He claims that tables render much faster
>than DIVs which sounded odd to me, considering how many people say that
>DIVs render much faster than tables.
>Is there any research that shows one being faster than the other (or,
>for that matter, neither really being signficantly faster)? Is
>rendering speed linked more to the size and complexity of the page?
I don't know if there is any research.
Modern day computers are fast, and I doubt many people would notice any
difference between the rendering of tables and DIVs.
Like for like, IMO a page made of DIVs would probably have a smaller
size and download quicker. And would probably render quicker because
the browser doesn't have to do so much hard work making table and
contents fit each other.
I use a fairly slow 450mhz Windows Me during development. I can usually
tell whether a page is table or DIV based by the speed and way it
renders. To me tables seem slower.
--
Martin Jay
Phone/SMS: +44 7740 191877
Fax: +44 870 915 2124
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|