apartment therapy changing the world, one room at a time

I like the idea more in a kitchen/breakfast if only for 2 or 3 people or as a breakfast area in a small spot in an equally small kitchen.

But for a proper dining room or area, a standard table/chairs is much more appropriate I think, especially if you intend on dinners with 6 or more people with proper settings etc.

These showed up in San Francisco in 2005, and I was totally taken with them, largely because the height is potentially more comfortable for working on projects.

Then when we changed dining tables, we stuck with normal height because I have a thing for vintage dining chairs.

It's probably just as well... the thought of my 5'0" mother-in-law trying to scale a counter-height table is scary. The poor woman would need a step ladder and a booster seat.

My old roommate had one of the high dining tables and we never, ever sat there. It was way too awkward.

In 2001, my mother bought a high dining table for her eat-in kitchen, so the "high life" is pretty normal for me. I really don't see too much of a difference when eating at a high or low table.

Can't stand them... can't stand "breakfast bars" either.

As a vertically challenged individual I can say that I feel like a child in "high chair" on these things. They feel precarious to me even if they are not.

i'm building myself one to also expand my kitchen work space in my tiny open condo and other than having difficulties finding chairs that are just right, it's really quite enjoyable to use. and, it sits 12.

There are so many nay-saying comments here, so I'll throw in my own. I adore the counter-height tables from a functional standpoint. I'm nearly 6' tall and I find it much more comfortable to have the extra leg room afforded by the height. Admittedly, my much shorter friends require a bit of a run and a jump. . . so if I were to ever purchase a formal table it'd probably be regular height.