What is better for SEO: Using TABLE (or) DIV?

[astounding]

Hello,

Just just wondering if anyone has experience or know on what's is better to use.

Because both can be used to align or position tables neatly.

But question is do SE's like one more then the other.

porky.

 

[westwebsite]

DIV is better,ofcouse!:angel:

 

[jenny]

Some say <div> tags are not SEO friendly...so its a matter of concern.

 

[antispyware]

Some say <div> tags are not SEO friendly...so its a matter of concern.

I have never heard anybody saying that <div> tags are bad for seo.
I prefer divs rather than nested tables.
Actually search engines neglect the code and consider the textual content.
So, use them wherever they are necessary.

 

[Jan]

Content is better for SEO

 

[jenny]

So irrespective of codes used, uniqueness in content would be rewarding.

 

[d-j]

here:
http://www.webmaster-talk.com/the-google-forum/56243-seo-and-div-tag.html

table or div have no effect in SEO i think..

the quality of content and url friendly (use url rewrite) are most important than them

 

[tpnoc]

As long as the search engine views both the same, they technically have the same effect.

 

[TSO]

It doesn't really matter, in regards to SEO. As for browser standards, however, DIV is better.

 

[jjoshua]

DIV seems more browser friendly. As for SEO friendly, there is no difference I suppose (correct me if i am wrong)

 

[iBrightDev]

Hello,

Just just wondering if anyone has experience or know on what's is better to use.

Because both can be used to align or position tables neatly.

But question is do SE's like one more then the other.

porky.

roflmao...
ok, now that that is out of my system, i can answer. it doesnt matter between divs or tables. it is based on content, keywords, and backlinks. so, do what you are comfortable using.

DIV is better,ofcouse!:angel:

no they are not. do some googling if that is what you really think. may be for page firendly, but have nothing to do with SEO.