Thanks for your true thought akadis. As I was browsing through websites on the subject of "tables or css", I found an article that was very interesting in whether to use css or tables.
Although I would love to make the switch to CSS layout instead of tables, there are too many issues involved to make it successful.
First there is the maintenance problem. Secondly, most new browsers still just don't have it right. I applaud the Web Standards Project for their effort in getting people to upgrade, but it's not enough. IE 5 renders pages differently than IE 6, and it's a whole different matter with Netscape 6.2 and Opera 6. With CSS layout, the browsers all have their quirks that you need to hack through. Same goes for writing compatible DHTML for multiple browsers. With tables, every browser since Mosaic can pretty much get the layout just right. That's a big plus for usability and layout design. But it's a tradeoff since it hinders the accessibility for non-visual and older browsers.
A big issue is to determine the site's audience. For government, education, or non-profits, the percentage of Netscape 4.x users is much higher. Many government agencies have standardized on Netscape 4, so your designs must work perfectly for them. Even if your client's CEO uses Netscape 3, they will want the design that matched your comps on their monitor — not a column-less list of content.
For internal or controlled-audience sites that you has a CMS system or knowledgable people to maintain it, go for all CSS positioning. But for the mass-internet audience, it's probably best to stick with CSS for the fonts and leave positioning to the tables.