Preferring layouting with tables is just an excuse for someone's own laziness.
You can use tables for a prototype, but as I learned: Prototypes may NEVER EVER be distributed.

i think too that a layout without tables would be clearer and better. but i´m using tables yet, cause its easier to create for me.

i think a problem is, that people (like me) got too many problems by creating a (floating) layout only with css. and to tell the truth: i dont want to grapple with it long. i want a good tutorial with examples. so if you know a good one, please tell me

The best way i would say is to look at other sites which use css only layouts and have a look at the stylesheet to see how they position elements etc.

Ever checked out http://de.selfhtml.org/ ?
Thats my first resource for looking things up.

I think that it also depends greatly on the type of site. If im going to make a quick portfolio site, that is 1 or 2 pages, and that Im not going to be changing very much dynamically on, as well as a style that I will be sticking with. Ill do tables.

If I'm setting up a e-store, building a login/bio/task system, I'll use css because the user can select different styles, I can keep certain areas a little cleaner, and to be honest, my code is a little easier to read.

All that aside, I'm for from professional, it takes me forever just to get a box to look right in one browser with css, so I only do it as a hobby, like I got paid $300 only to build a system for a group I'm a part of where users can log in, send messages to eachother check dynamic updates, upload and download minutes/reports, added a shoutbox, and set up a system where each feature can be allowed/disallowed per person.

At least you got payed.
To me only one person said thanks, and now nobody is using the appointment planer or even taking a look at the planned appointments.

Everybody asking for some web stuff will now get the answer "no", because I'm fed up.
Unless he pulls out some money.

eek. i hate tables now

i helped someone put their site back together. they made it in tables and then changed image sizes etc. gameover.
takes forever trying to fix it back up, moreso the more complicated the layout and content are

if it were css it wouldn't have taken long at all (especially for someone who knows the right properties), probably quicker than setting up tables in the first place. but then changing it around is so easy

so ecommerce level of website - no tables.
simple unimportant site? tables will do i guess

Well, I am never working with tables, but I can fully understand people using them. The web standards were made to help people doing things easier, but the missing support of the browsers (yes, IE, I'm looking at you) made it more complicated and only the easiest but at the same time dirtiest variant was proven to work properly in all browsers with little effort.

But now, where all big browsers were proselytised to the right path, it should be a looooot easier to work with proper standards and hopefully we won't hear excuses for bad web design so often anymore.

PS: and of course good web design is not only some esoteric stuff some web designers worry about (of course it is, too, it's like going farting and burping to a good restaurant), but it's directly related to speed, usability and maintenance costs.

If I remember correctly Joomla is also using tables?
But why, when everyone says tables are bad?

Maybe Joomla was done by programmers.