What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
Not All Free Anti-Virus Software Is Created Equal view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
29 Comments
- johnnysaucepn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Reported 'flaws' are due to author's misunderstanding of the ACID2 test. Opera's behaviour is correct, including fixed positioned elements and scrolling behaviour
Secondly, the author refers to the W3C site, where he means the WASP site.
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/acid/ - howie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7natmaster, please read the page. And there's a post over at WaSP's too:
"You are missing something. Please read this article:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/acid/
If you scroll, you invalidate the test. What you are seeing is what is meant to happen. If you still need clarification, please check the source code of the test yourself and check out the CSS fixed positioning that is used." - howie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8The story is inaccurate, and Opera 9.0 final does not have any bugs that break Acid2.
- howie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7This should be reported as inaccurate. See the link johnnysaucepn posted.
Opera behaves exactly as expected, and does pass Acid2. - danielg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Buried - Inaccurate
The story inaccurately points out that Opera 9 does NOT pass the Acid2 test. That hasn't been proven yet. The blog post by the Web Standards Group merely pointed out that it's being questioned. - Atavachron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Funny how this natmaster guy (nahaniel) tried to spread FUD about Opera and ends up shooting himself in the foot.
You clearly don't have a clue about how Acid2 is supposed to work:
you cannot scroll, you cannot use zoom, fit to width, resize the window or enable a customized user style-sheet.
This story is inaccurate/FUD. Just a zealot begging for attention. - howie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6By the way, natmaster, will you post a retraction at your site? Those are some harsh words you posted about Opera! Why the hostility? Is it really that terrible that Opera passed Acid2 before Firefox? Why would Opera lie about Acid2?
- worbd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Why is natmaster being dugg up, and people questioning his crusade being dugg down?
Several people who actually know Acid2 well have explained that natmaster is wrong. He uses a vague comment on webstandards.org to support his claim, but the fact is that all it does is to refer to "some reports", and that's it. It in no way concludes that Opera doesn't pass Acid2. Read the webstandards.org blog post:
http://www.webstandards.org/2006/07/13/acid2-and-opera-9-problems/
He also ignores the fact that the howtocreate page was the one revealing that Konqueror didn't pass Acid2 after all. The guy who runs the site knows his stuff.
So what it basically boils down to is that a Firefox fan, natmaster, flames Opera on his site, and ignores the fact that several people in the know are telling him that what he is seeing is the expected behavior.
Who are all these people who are digging down people telling natmaster why he is wrong? Why aren't they commenting? - worbd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4"I must wonder at what level we can trust a company who, in their effort to expand their audience, made many extravagant claims"
What are these extravagant claims, Nathaniel? - worbd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Got any examples of their now removed claims then? I'm really curious, because I can't recall seeing a lot of extravagant claims from Opera. Not more than from Mozilla anyway. Such as when the Minimo project lead talked about how Minimo would redefine mobile browsing with these fantastic innovations, when it turned out that they had stolen them all from Opera's browser. And to add insult to injury, he made "extravangant" claims about how much more portable Mozilla is than Opera, despite the fact that Opera Mobile is available for a heck of a lot more mobile platforms than Minimo, and he has no basis for such a claim unless he has seen Opera's source code, in which case he would be under NDA and not in a position to make such statements anyway.
And we all know about Asa's Opera-bashing.
And when Mozilla sent a nasty letter to Opera shortly before the launch of 9.0 where they wanted Opera to sign an agreement before they were allowed to use the new RSS icon (which wasn't even created by Mozilla in the first place)... Which forced Opera to re-instate the old icon until the mess was sorted out. (Luckily, Mozilla later realized the errors of their ways after a storm of criticism.)
But anyway, what were these claims by Opera? I'm just curious. - Atavachron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Dude, you screwed it up. Get over it. You conveniently avoid all the explanations given to you (even by people who actually where involved in writing Acid2).
The line you (mis)quoted is explaining the scalp and what happens to it *if* you scroll, it's not telling you that scrolling is part of the test nor you should do it. The whole paragraph:
"This row is the scalp of the face and it tests fixed positioning, minimum and maximum heights, and minimum and maximum widths. In the markup, the row is represented by a p element which is fixed to the window rather than the scrollable canvas. If the Acid2 page is scrolled, the scalp will stay fixed in place, becoming unstuck from the rest of the face, which will scroll."
Quoting what it has already been explained to you at WaSP:
"You are missing something. Please read this article:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/acid/
If you scroll, you invalidate the test. What you are seeing is what is meant to happen. If you still need clarification, please check the source code of the test yourself and check out the CSS fixed positioning that is used."
"The forehead is a fixed position element. It will stay still when you scroll. That is correct behaviour. The test only works when it is at the default position after clicking the link. That is the correct response." - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6"I say "kudos" to Opera, for their great strides in standards-compliance. However, I must wonder at what level we can trust a company who, in their effort to expand their audience, made many extravagant claims. Claims whose veracity comes into question more and more every day. Unfortunately (for them), one thing I have come to expect from my browser vendors is honesty - even Microsoft has turned around onto the right path in this regard."
Yeah right. Firefox is the most honest company. People really have short memory. For eg. their Minimo campaign was a total brain wash full of lies.
http://stuff.techwhack.com/archives/2004/12/10/opera-vs-mozilla-minimo/
Have a look at the blogposts of one of their Devs Asa Doltzer, about Opera. They are misleading to say the least.
And so is this article. Zoom and scroll arent a part of the acid2 test.
Reported Story as Inacurate. - howie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The Acid2 guide clearly states that the test is scrollable.
- worbd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Funny how natmaster in reply to Atavachron quotes the part from the Acid2 guide which proves himself wrong. Did he change his mind all of a sudden? Except on his FUD page, he writes:
"It seems as though there is some disagreement as to what passing the Acid 2 test actually entails."
There is no disagreement. Some of the people who wrote Acid2 told you that you were wrong. People who have written an analysis of Acid2 told you that you were wrong. People who actually read what Acid2 is supposed to test told you that you were wrong.
FYI: Safari was the first browser to pass. Konqueror did not pass before Opera after all.
Further:
"It is nice to witness progress with regard to increasing standards acceptance"
Yes, nice isn't it? And guess what Opera has done for many years: Put real money into standards. Opera has paid people to work on standards - to do work for the W3C. Opera was the first browser with proper CSS support. One of the creator of CSS works for Opera. And so on.
By the way, I'm still wondering why natmaster's comments are being dugg up, while people who are replying to his lame excuses are being dugg down. - howie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3'As it should be obvious - since they have different marketing material now than when I last checked, Opera does NOT stay the same.'
You need to re-read your browser history. All the claims Firefox now makes have been made by Opera many years ago.
As for features, it's a fact that most of the new features in 1.5 were already available in Opera. Just look at the feature list, and then look at Opera. Opera has nearly all of them.
Also, people are asking about "extravagant claims" from Opera. worbd wrote "stolen them all from Opera's browser", not Opera software.
And regarding the icon: What's wrong is Mozilla taking an icon created by someone else, trying to trademark it, and sending nasty letters to people they had previously allowed to use the icon (shortly before they were to release a new version)? And open standards are open standards. If the RSS icon is to be a standard, the Mozilla Corporation needs to let go. And it did, eventually.
I also notice that your page is still up, with a summary that doesn't make sense now that we know that the entire page was written without any basis in reality. - howie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2That statment does not state that Opera does not pass.
- howie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3'If I recall correctly, for a time they said things like "Fastest, Safest, Best," etc. Thing like that, that seemed to be taken from the Firefox marketing handbook, but taken to the extreme of absolutes.'
You are joking, right? Opera has been around for a lot longer than Firefox.
'In the case of innovation, I highly doubt every feature in Opera was original.'
Straw man, since no one ever claimed that.
'When Firefox gets blamed for bringing tabbed browsing to the mainstream, I often here O-fanboys claiming that Opera was the first browser to use tabbed browser. Any educated person knows that the first tabbed browser was from way back in 96'.'
Opera was around in 1996. It was started as a research project in the early 1990s. It had multiple documents inside the main window before anyone else, but InternetWorks was the first one with actual tabs.
'I don't think stealing is a proper term at all, after all mimicking is the greatest compliment - but it seems O-fanboys don't take compliments well.'
What does this have to do with "extravagant claims" by Opera?
'And if you want to talk about 'stealing,' then we're really going to have to bring up Opera, because they practically ripped the entire layout from Firefox when they released version 8'
Is this some kind of joke? Have you ever seen older versions of Opera, or even Internet Explorer?
'About RSS, IE is using the icon now, because Mozilla let them. That's right - they had a meeting to discuss adoption....because they had to get permission from Mozilla.'
Opera got permission, but then received a letter. - Ausare, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3natmaster: Sorry do you even know what you are talking about?
Oh and have you tried Firefox Beta 2? Talking about ripping of UI. Take a look at the x's on the tabs and the positioning of the dropdown in the search field. Is it the same as they had in Firefox 1.5 or maybe the same as Opera has had for a time?
BTW love your article on Acid 2. It really shows you are not competent enough to read anything.
Read this one 100 times and see if you can understand it:
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#fixed-positioning
"The only difference is that for a fixed positioned box, the containing block is established by the viewport. For continuous media, fixed boxes do not move when the document is scrolled."
This means Operas is right when scrolling the Acid 2 test. Heck you even quoted the part confirming Opera is right and didn't understand it when you used it as a argument for Opera being wrong.
Sorry, but it's just really sad that incompetent persons like you have access to the web and can spread FUD like that.. - SpookyET, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Opera 9 Final has a bug with forms and page zoom. If I'm not mistaken, the Acid2 Test has forms in its code. That bug was fixed in the latest weekly.
Story is inaccurate. - johnnysaucepn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3"It's hard to lie about something when the entire development process and source code is open to the public."
No, it really isn't. The development process isn't always about writing code. It's about the conversations and the speculation and the press releases and the pitches for funding. - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4The story talks about Opera 9, not some weekly that no one uses.
- natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3@flyinglikeakite
It's hard to lie about something when the entire development process and source code is open to the public. - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Upon further investigation, I have discovered that Opera's website has removed many of the absolute statements they had in the past, and replaced them with more subjective marketing statements. Because of this, I retract my earlier statement about extravagant claims. As such, I have removed that paragraph from my article.
I believe in judging companies by their current actions, not of their past. I am glad to see Opera getting itself in shape, and hope my temporary ignorance (because I had not checked their site recently) does not cause a great burden in your life. - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Wow, that was a fast reaction - you must really be checking for updates :P.
If I recall correctly, for a time they said things like "Fastest, Safest, Best," etc. Thing like that, that seemed to be taken from the Firefox marketing handbook, but taken to the extreme of absolutes. If you're looking for hard evidence, I never took the time to take screen shots for such a silly thing.
In the case of innovation, I highly doubt every feature in Opera was original. When Firefox gets blamed for bringing tabbed browsing to the mainstream, I often here O-fanboys claiming that Opera was the first browser to use tabbed browser. Any educated person knows that the first tabbed browser was from way back in 96'. I don't think stealing is a proper term at all, after all mimicking is the greatest compliment - but it seems O-fanboys don't take compliments well. Now, I'm not saying that Opera came up with all these features, because in reality a lot of them are extremely obvious for years until the implementation details are worked out. Whoever gets it in their product first surely does not constitute conception. And if you want to talk about 'stealing,' then we're really going to have to bring up Opera, because they practically ripped the entire layout from Firefox when they released version 8 (first free version - the ones before had a BUNCH of crap wasting space).
In the mobile space, I can't really say anything, because I've never owned a cell phone in my life, so it's not really relevant to me.
About RSS, IE is using the icon now, because Mozilla let them. That's right - they had a meeting to discuss adoption....because they had to get permission from Mozilla. - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Q:"You are joking, right? Opera has been around for a lot longer than Firefox."
A:As it should be obvious - since they have different marketing material now than when I last checked, Opera does NOT stay the same. It would be silly for them to not change - they are not stupid. I cannot say the same about some other individuals though...
Q:"Straw man, since no one ever claimed that."
A:"...these fantastic innovations, when it turned out that they had stolen them all from Opera's browser."
Q:"Opera was around in 1996. It was started as a research project in the early 1990s. It had multiple documents inside the main window before anyone else, but InternetWorks was the first one with actual tabs."
A:Well, at least you agree with me on one thing. :)
Q:"What does this have to do with "extravagant claims" by Opera?"
A:"when it turned out that they had stolen them all from Opera's browser."
Q:"Is this some kind of joke? Have you ever seen older versions of Opera, or even Internet Explorer?"
A:I have played with Opera since version 6, before then, I had glanced at it, but it really wasn't interesting enough then. I've played with IE since version 3.
Q:"Opera got permission, but then received a letter."
A:Okay, at least you agree now that Mozilla had rights to it. Now what's wrong with Mozilla asking for a more formal agreement for using their icon? - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2"If the Acid2 page is scrolled, the scalp will stay fixed in place, becoming unstuck from the rest of the face, which will scroll."
From the official WaSP acid2 guide: http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/guide/ - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2First off, I never once said they lied, I assumed they were mistaken. To quote, "I would not go as far to say that Opera deliberately lied about the level of standards-compliance their browser provides."
Secondly, the howtocreate page quote you have there seems to be speculation, whereas reading the Acid2 explanation on WaSP's site seems to imply otherwise. Although it appears these issues need to be more well documented. - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"Because of this inconsistency, one of these browsers is not really passing the test as well as they claim."
That is the only statement I can find that explicitly states Opera does not pass the test. I have heard several comments that Konqueror was actually the browser not passing, in which case the statement still holds true. - natmaster, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3“If the Acid2 page is scrolled, the scalp will stay fixed in place, becoming unstuck from the rest of the face, which will scroll.” And then to the left, is a black rectangle - not what the screen shots show.
If you have some better explanation, please tell.
