The second table, using a variation of alternating periodization, is more "hip" because it's relatively new to American strength training. Despite this, West German sports scientist Dietmar Schmidtbliecher, one of its early proponents, was writing about this method some 20 years ago! So, in reality, it's no more "new" than linear periodization. I find this method to be effective for those who have the necessary experience to handle more radical shifts in their program, and for those who are more interested in size than strength. It's certainly effective in keeping the body continually adapting!
Even combining low and high reps is a waste of time if your main focus is mass gains, because all those low rep sets are a waste of energy that could be put into building tissue post-workout. You still end up with a lower metabolic rate doing combo than you would if all you did was high reps, which means less total mass gains than high reps only. Heavy lifting also causes joint problems, spinal compression, rheumatoid arthritis, and nasty injuries like muscle and tendon tears. I can see how a high rep finisher set would be great for powerlifters to keep from plateauing in strength gains by increasing mass gains, but for someone interested in general fitness or bodybuilding, high-low combos are a complete waste of time.