Why? HTML will still look as good, but won't do as much.
Would you? Yes. You have to use it to get the job done. Hint: Don't tell people that it is slow, scrappy and a poor-mans Actionscript. They don't like it. Seriously, they really don't. I said it once .... I didn't get away with.
A simple example:
Use the Firefox consol
Times table using a for loop
You can develop it further by adding methods to the object. This example is presented with Literal namespacing:
This is a very clean, very pretty way of presenting an object.
We are likely to want to develop multiple people. Rather than creating an object for each person and repeat the code, we can create a function to create this object for us.
However, things start to get a bit messy when you try and extend it. Personally, if you are going to use OOP, you have to extend and share properties to make it worth it. It can be done and here is an example. This example is presented with Constructor namespacing.
Seriously. Life is to short for something this ugly. If you want to extend object in JS, use Underscore.js
.. or as I discovered much later, Jquery does it even better