What is Digg?173 Comments
- CptnObvious, on 10/12/2007, -0/+110Internet Explorer 6: http://www.autark.se/ie6-acid2.png
Opera 9: http://my.opera.com/tarquinwj/homes/albums/45511/Opera9.png
Konqueror 3.5: http://www.autark.se/konq3.5-acid2.png
Firefox 1.5: http://www.davidbetz.net/webdesign/Firefox15Acid2.png
Safari 2: http://www.tomrafteryit.net/images/safari_acid2_test.png - lolwtfhaha, on 10/12/2007, -2/+65I think the reason this is so funny is that the head looks completely cut in half with blood all over the place. It's almost as if MS is having the last laugh on this... "I'm going to ***** murder that stupid acid2 face!" *throws chair*
- windzero, on 10/12/2007, -9/+64@ arunforce
I afriad its doesnt make any difference even when it is out of beta. - mrASSMAN, on 10/12/2007, -6/+52looks like the smiley is on acid there..
- Dracos, on 10/12/2007, -2/+43Beta or not, IE7's rendering engine has been feature complete for months, MS has stated this repeatedly.
IE7 is a lame duck as far as web standards are concerned. Sure, they finally implemented alpha transparency and fixed some CSS bugs in a piece-meal fashion, but it's basically still just IE6 under the hood (which is still IE5.5 under the hood). MS seems to think that a lousy new UI, more user nanny tools (phishing blocker, popup blocker, etc), and a slightly tweaked rendering core and security model is worth a full version number increment. It's not. With nominal fixes to the event model, DOM support, box model support, XML support, corrrect mime type support, and CSS, this is really just a maintenance release on a codebase that's at least 8 years old.
They should call IE7 what it really is: 5.7. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+49_THAT_ is the funniest thing you've ever seen? Wow.
- dear1mr1kilgore, on 10/12/2007, -6/+40In the age of nearly perpetual betas (e.g., GMail), beta testing on users should not involve solving basic issues with core functionality. Besides, if you install IE7, it replaces IE6. Beta is hardly a "test" under these conditions.
- CptnObvious, on 10/12/2007, -5/+34ok maybe not the funniest but probably the most pathetic.
- erichapkido, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29@masterofshadows
When you hover over the nose it turns blue. - summerflow, on 10/12/2007, -4/+32Didn't Microsoft said there'll be no rendering changes until it release?
- PhAdE, on 10/12/2007, -4/+31For what it's worth Firefox looks terrible too.
- MarkByers, on 10/12/2007, -6/+32Erm, people *do* use web standards. They are called developers.
- electrichead, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26Can you take screenshots with other browsers for comparison's sake? Like IE6, Firefox, Opera, Safari ...
- celticeric, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Actual real lynx results:
Hello World!
ERROR
*
*
*
* - avatarpalin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24ummm
HELLO WORLD
_.-'''''-._
.' _ _ '.
/ (o) (o)
| |
| / |
'. .' /
'. `'---'` .'
'-._____.-' - Powerdrift, on 10/12/2007, -6/+27and Safari
- Hootyea, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21Are you trolling or just an idiot?
- eridius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18mephitex - you don't understand how Acid2 works. It's designed so each line of the image tests a handful of different parts of CSS rendering. So if you have a tiny bug in your rendering, it will affect one line, not the entire image.
- danieldaniel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18@arunforce
Maybe you didn't notice, but IE 6 looks terrible too. I don't think that is still in beta. - Virion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16I happened to have a copy of ie 5.2 (mac) kicking around. It doesn't even render! I had to view source just to be sure it was even accessing the page.
- i440, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17I wonder how Lynx would render the Acid2 test.
- aurath, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19woot for opera
- CptnObvious, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Coral Cache: http://www.notmart.org.nyud.net:8080/images/2_ie7-acid2.jpg
Another one: http://my.opera.com/tifa/homes/albums/28055/acid2.JPG - jetpig, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18firefox doesn't pass either. the only two to my knowledge that render correctly are konquerer and opera.
- JMJimmy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Seeing as every page people develop and the people who view those pages use this part of the program, even though unseen, it's pretty key.
Would you accept this in something like an accounting software? "We chose to focus on the options percentages of our demographics like to use instead of getting the math right in the background - you may find results aren't what they're supposed to be, but you can fix it by tweaking the numbers to get the result you want"
Sure people will do it (Enron! ;) but that doesn't make it right. - Zero456, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Well, at least the jump from IE6 to IE7 improved it's results, though as little as it is.
- earthtoandy, on 10/12/2007, -11/+24And Safari, it was the first to pass the acid2 test
- wastern, on 10/12/2007, -14/+27your beloved firefox sucks it up as well, get off your high horse about it
(P.S. I'm not defending IE or MS, I use Safari. I just think you all look like asses when you call out IE7 beta, when the release version of the browser you all love to brag about fails as well) - masterofshadows, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15just FYI the way its supposed to look is like the reference image:
http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/reference.html
check your browser with the test:
http://www.webstandards.org/files/acid2/test.html#top
@CptnObvious:
I am not sure why your opera 9 is coming up with a blue nose, was that a screencap from one of the preview releases? - MarkByers, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Yeah it is just one simple bug: including Internet Explorer as the default web browser.
- Alchemeron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14It's pretty convenient that the items that aren't a core priority -- like meeting standards (which is what the acid2 test is for) -- are the things that are flagrantly failures.
- motang, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Yeah it seems to be a huge jump from IE6 to IE7. But so far it looks like KHTML based browsers (Safari, Konqueror) and Opera 9 seem to have it down. Firefox is getting there, closer than IE7.
- CircleFusion, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10The strange thing to me about the ACID2 test is the argument about what it actually tests. According to the wikipedia page( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid2 ), it tests CSS and HTML web standards. However, on the Microsoft IE blog site (and I've read this in other places as well) they mention that ACID2 actually tests something other than strictly standards. They are vague about it though, but it seems to test the browser's ability to handle invalid code.
From http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/07/29/445242.aspx
"...the Acid 2 Test covers a wide set of functionality and standards, not just from CSS2.1 and HTML 4.01, selected by the authors as a “wish list” of features they’d like to have. It’s pointedly not a compliance test (from the Test Guide: “Acid2 does not guarantee conformance with any specification”)."
Here is a blog by the guy (Dave Hyatt) responsible for making Safari pass the ACID2 test. His blog chronicles the process of being ACID2 compliant.
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2005_04.html
He covers some of the issues of the test in more detail. A lot of his comments refer to rendering "invalid code".
"I needed to support fallback content when invalid MIME types were specified or when bad status codes were returned for HTTP requests (like 404)."
I think there are a lot of public misunderstandings about the ACID2 test. - alphex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12its amazing that people have this attitude. if you work at a major software development firm, there are stringent best practices being used by the staff to make sure the development happens smoothly and in a way that the entire company can be used as developers of the project needs further development down the line.
Standards in web development are striving for the same goal! provide an even frame work for everyone to work in in a way that ensures compatibility across platforms, and furthers the exploration of whats possible, instead of all of us spending our time trying to fix the simple stuff across browsers.
The acid 2 test is the ideal that we all should be GOOD coders, not hacks who have to bend the rules to make it look the same from platform A to platform B.
That MS sees it any other way says bad things to me about how they behave as a corporation building the critical software that they supposedly build so well... - MarkByers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10As an open source browser you know how to fix it: apply the Acid 2 patches and it works.
There are already branches of Firefox that pass Acid 2, but you need to go get them yourself. - MarkByers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Firefox passes too (it was the 5th of the major browsers to pass), but you need to get the correct branch, which is not advertised on their website. Here is some more informaiton about it: http://diary.e-gandalf.net/2006/04/12/meet-mr-face/
- Loonacy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11Safari is based on khtml, which is the engine behind Konquerer. After Apple updated Safari to pass the test, I believe they assisted the khtml devs to pass the test as well.
- dear1mr1kilgore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10CSS2 standards should be a priority. I'm glad to hear that the IE7 team is working hard to fix the more important of the _many_ rendering bugs, but poor implementation of CSS2 standards will set the bar lower for many, many years. These issues should be solved before IE7 becomes the 90% standard, resulting in more unwieldly CSS hacks.
- CBTF, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17Doesnt look right in FF either, point?
- Tyrax, on 10/12/2007, -12/+20They talked about this a while back:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/07/29/445242.aspx
They never planned to pass the ACID2 test, I would rather concentrate on stuff people actually use - lazyrussian, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12which saddens this firefox user deeply.
I guess firefox should take a page out of Opera or Konqueror when it comes to compatibility.
FF is still my choice browser - Nanobe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Opera is certainly not completely standards compliant. No browser is. And given that the standards are always evolving and growing, it's likely that none will ever be. Opera 8.5 and Firefox 1.5 were about matched when it came to support for CSS 2.1, although both were lacking support in different areas. Opera 9 now generally beats Firefox 1.5 in CSS 2.1 support, although only by a few percentage points. Firefox 1.5 generally had better support than Opera 8.5 for HTML/XHTML, the near-ready sections of CSS 3, and DOM. Firefox 3.0, to be released in under a year, will have significant improvements in standards support, and Opera also isn't losing steam. Safari and Konqueror like to support a lot of cutting-edge things, although they have serious problems with some of the more fundamental areas of the standards, especially in scripting. IE7 made slight progress over IE6 in CSS, a little in HTML (XHTML is still treated exactly like regular HTML), and basically nothing in DOM/ECMAScript support, and generally made less progress over IE6 than the latest versions of Firefox and Opera made over their previous versions.
The information comes from the standards support resource I maintain: http://www.webdevout.net/browser_support.php - aurath, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11probly trolling, they don't make them THAT dumb.
- azygousguy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11looks like the safari crowd has spoken...
- Trel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Well as long as we're comparing, here's Firebird 0.7
http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/5429/firebirdacid3ji.jpg - MarkByers, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Found a link if you are interested: http://diary.e-gandalf.net/2006/04/12/meet-mr-face/
- tuartboy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+17safari as well. anything on webkit I believe.
didn't safari beat konqueror and then konqueror got it from apple? can't remember. - Hootyea, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13What isn't in beta though?
- kpavery, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9A lot of people give a ***** about those "pissant" browsers...especially Firefox. And Safari, which actually displays correctly....
- tylerni7, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9I'm sure they're done with the rendering engine for IE 7, they're probably just using the same one from before. I bet all they're doing now is working out bugs, and this is not a bug. But in all fairness, Firefox doesn't pass either (although it does a hell of a lot better...).
-
Show 51 - 100 of 173 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
