Comments on: Next Explorer to fail Acid test

Microsoft says IE 7 won't pass the standards exam; rivals Opera and Apple say they'll meet criteria set by World Wide Web Consortium.

Microsoft - in the middle of the box

This is just one more indication that Microsoft is only the leader in
what they sell and not a true technology leader. Their way of doing
business is truly "works as coded" and anyone who purchases their
latest software, which is really just the latest beta version, is
subject to security holes and second rate software. This is
exempolified by IE, which is quickly becoming the dog of browsers.

Microsoft - in the middle of the box

This is just one more indication that Microsoft is only the leader in
what they sell and not a true technology leader. Their way of doing
business is truly "works as coded" and anyone who purchases their
latest software, which is really just the latest beta version, is
subject to security holes and second rate software. This is
exempolified by IE, which is quickly becoming the dog of browsers.

[tygrus]

W3C Browser Standards

MS should do what the standard says OR campaign strongly against the standard to show good reason why it doesn't follow the rules.
It's not just the issue that MS IE supports all the W3C HTML, XHTML, CCS etc. standards it's the faulty implementation of those standards when it attempts support.

For example (abstracted slightly)
The world standard is that "2 + 2 = 4". If with IE7, "2 + 2 = 5" then it doesn't comply with the standard even thou MS may say that it was too hard to fix it so that "2 + 2 = 4" and that "anyway, 2 + 2 = 5 means you can count faster so IE is better than the standard".
This is a better summary of the problems. Not that they have or not implemented a feature but that an implemented feature results in different behaviour than the standard.
If the little guys (OpenSource) with very little money (compared to the big MS) can do it then MS should be able to do it. If they don't people should change browsers. Tech savy people should extol the frtures of those who can and redicle those who can't. That's what the standard based tests allow us to do whithout fear of retribution.

[tygrus]

W3C Browser Standards

MS should do what the standard says OR campaign strongly against the standard to show good reason why it doesn't follow the rules.
It's not just the issue that MS IE supports all the W3C HTML, XHTML, CCS etc. standards it's the faulty implementation of those standards when it attempts support.

For example (abstracted slightly)
The world standard is that "2 + 2 = 4". If with IE7, "2 + 2 = 5" then it doesn't comply with the standard even thou MS may say that it was too hard to fix it so that "2 + 2 = 4" and that "anyway, 2 + 2 = 5 means you can count faster so IE is better than the standard".
This is a better summary of the problems. Not that they have or not implemented a feature but that an implemented feature results in different behaviour than the standard.
If the little guys (OpenSource) with very little money (compared to the big MS) can do it then MS should be able to do it. If they don't people should change browsers. Tech savy people should extol the frtures of those who can and redicle those who can't. That's what the standard based tests allow us to do whithout fear of retribution.

[rrsvt]

Bottleneck Bought

Started with Coco16k to go on to CoCo32k that worked great to early 90's. Then I was given a second hand Austin Selective Win3x, that doesn't work programs, but handles affairs, as expected. Capacity requirements settled for a DellDim81 cutting edge, 2001, with WinMEOS that was a break through with IBM ThinkPads UK. It is, still, a blast with WME expectancy, to continue working the yard of heaping, heaping. The Longhorn has been considered for a new OS, as well as RedHat and some Linux. I am happy to be waiting, patiently, for the finishing touches fully applied for the WinVista & IE7. Now, to prepare all the alerts, and such, for tomorrow. CoCo WinME Vista. Yeah, Compaq has always had a FullFillMent responsible, too. Si yeah.

[rrsvt]

Bottleneck Bought

I am used to Dell OEM. And, it is new to me, IE7 and WinVista. When compatability fits: OEM, Dell, Si yeah.

[rrsvt]

Bottleneck Bought

Started with Coco16k to go on to CoCo32k that worked great to early 90's. Then I was given a second hand Austin Selective Win3x, that doesn't work programs, but handles affairs, as expected. Capacity requirements settled for a DellDim81 cutting edge, 2001, with WinMEOS that was a break through with IBM ThinkPads UK. It is, still, a blast with WME expectancy, to continue working the yard of heaping, heaping. The Longhorn has been considered for a new OS, as well as RedHat and some Linux. I am happy to be waiting, patiently, for the finishing touches fully applied for the WinVista & IE7. Now, to prepare all the alerts, and such, for tomorrow. CoCo WinME Vista. Yeah, Compaq has always had a FullFillMent responsible, too. Si yeah.

[rrsvt]

Bottleneck Bought

I am used to Dell OEM. And, it is new to me, IE7 and WinVista. When compatability fits: OEM, Dell, Si yeah.

[wiley14]

Funny everyone goes after Microsoft

I find it quite amuzing that the anti-Microsoft crowd seems to forget a few years ago, none of the other browsers were compliant either. Fact is, does it really matter if a browser supports all the latest standards - if so many people are still using older browsers? If you're smart to begin with, you'll develop for the lowest common denominator. You wouldn't develop software that targets one particular processor, now would you? Come on, wake up people. Not everyone will have the latest and greatest of everything.

[System Tyrant]

In computer time...

CSS 1 & 2 are old men. Your right though, not very long ago browsers didn't support standards. But that was then and this is now. If we dwadle in the past we have no future.

Actually. . .

Software is compiled for a particular process, or at least a particular line, and that is only possible when the lines themselves are produced to be backwards-compatible, such as x86 chips. Thus, it's the processor makers who keep the software working from one processor to the next by maintaining the standards they created before, not those of us who write software.

Of course, this doesn't apply to languages like Java that run through a virtual machine; the virtual machine, however, is compiled for a specific processor. I'm sure there are other exceptions as well, but I'm not thinking of them right now.

Your other point is valid, except that I'm complaining because of the lack of standards support. While I do tend to be anti-MS, I try to give them the benefit of the doubt; in this case, I have a perfectly valid compliant that's valid regardless of my feelings about MS. IE should be far more standards-compliant.

[digantasaha]

Yours is an apologists point of view

While other browsers are passing or are trying to pass the latest
Acid 2 test, Microsoft is showing that they really don't care
about improving their browser. Simply because they are the
virtual monopoly when it comes to web browsers. They dragged
their feat for years before pop-up blocking was available and
attempted to address the biggest problems of self installed
Active X spyware and adware which afflicted an overwhelming
percentage of Windows users. It is not until Firefox really started
to gain traction that IE as a part of XP SP2 improved. Microsoft
needs solid competition to make good products. Without it it
falls back and accepts the status quo of being a monopoly with
no incentive to improve it's products. Not trying to pass the Acid
2 test is another example of the company's complacency. Vista
is touted as having all these great new technologies and
"innovative" (or copied) features. To say that the new IE won't
have the latest technologies or be compliant with the latest
standards is inexcusable from the world's largest, richest and
most influential software companies that control the market.

[wiley14]

Funny everyone goes after Microsoft

I find it quite amuzing that the anti-Microsoft crowd seems to forget a few years ago, none of the other browsers were compliant either. Fact is, does it really matter if a browser supports all the latest standards - if so many people are still using older browsers? If you're smart to begin with, you'll develop for the lowest common denominator. You wouldn't develop software that targets one particular processor, now would you? Come on, wake up people. Not everyone will have the latest and greatest of everything.

[System Tyrant]

In computer time...

CSS 1 & 2 are old men. Your right though, not very long ago browsers didn't support standards. But that was then and this is now. If we dwadle in the past we have no future.

Actually. . .

Software is compiled for a particular process, or at least a particular line, and that is only possible when the lines themselves are produced to be backwards-compatible, such as x86 chips. Thus, it's the processor makers who keep the software working from one processor to the next by maintaining the standards they created before, not those of us who write software.

Of course, this doesn't apply to languages like Java that run through a virtual machine; the virtual machine, however, is compiled for a specific processor. I'm sure there are other exceptions as well, but I'm not thinking of them right now.

Your other point is valid, except that I'm complaining because of the lack of standards support. While I do tend to be anti-MS, I try to give them the benefit of the doubt; in this case, I have a perfectly valid compliant that's valid regardless of my feelings about MS. IE should be far more standards-compliant.

[digantasaha]

Yours is an apologists point of view

While other browsers are passing or are trying to pass the latest
Acid 2 test, Microsoft is showing that they really don't care
about improving their browser. Simply because they are the
virtual monopoly when it comes to web browsers. They dragged
their feat for years before pop-up blocking was available and
attempted to address the biggest problems of self installed
Active X spyware and adware which afflicted an overwhelming
percentage of Windows users. It is not until Firefox really started
to gain traction that IE as a part of XP SP2 improved. Microsoft
needs solid competition to make good products. Without it it
falls back and accepts the status quo of being a monopoly with
no incentive to improve it's products. Not trying to pass the Acid
2 test is another example of the company's complacency. Vista
is touted as having all these great new technologies and
"innovative" (or copied) features. To say that the new IE won't
have the latest technologies or be compliant with the latest
standards is inexcusable from the world's largest, richest and
most influential software companies that control the market.

[digitallysick]

safari can pass the test =)

maybe billy gates needs to call Mr jobs and be like "ey, h0w d0 u mak3 ur safari s0 l33t"

[digitallysick]

safari can pass the test =)

maybe billy gates needs to call Mr jobs and be like "ey, h0w d0 u mak3 ur safari s0 l33t"

[danglingwrangler]

This doesn't surprise me ... Firefox rocks !!

For those emicrosoft pinheads ... firefox has 1000+ extensions (options) for everything. After using Firefox for 2+ years even IE7 seems like windows 3.1
No kidding !!!

[danglingwrangler]

This doesn't surprise me ... Firefox rocks !!

For those emicrosoft pinheads ... firefox has 1000+ extensions (options) for everything. After using Firefox for 2+ years even IE7 seems like windows 3.1
No kidding !!!

[danglingwrangler]

This doesn't surprise me ... Firefox rocks !!

For those microsoft pinheads ... firefox has 1000+ extensions (options) for everything. After using Firefox for 2+ years even IE7 seems like windows 3.1
No kidding !!!

[danglingwrangler]

This doesn't surprise me ... Firefox rocks !!

For those microsoft pinheads ... firefox has 1000+ extensions (options) for everything. After using Firefox for 2+ years even IE7 seems like windows 3.1
No kidding !!!

[419]

I.E. SUX!!

I.E. (IDIOTIC EXAMPLE?) SUX!!
EVER SINCE I 1st TRIED Mozilla FireFox, I SWEAR BY IT! UNCOMPARABLY FASTER, NO MORE SPY/AD/MAL WARE,AND JUST A BETTER BUILT BROWSER IN GENERAL.
THE ONLY TIME I USE I.E. NOW IS WHEN I LISTEN TO YAHOO JUKEBOX (Launchcast) BECAUSE ITs NOT COMPATIBLE WITH FIERFOX.
ON A DOWN NOTE THO, I PREFER OPERA BROWSER WHILE PLAYIN applet BASED GAMES, SUCH AS YAHOO HAS.......
BUT FOR EVERYTHING ELSE, ITs DEFFINATELY Mozilla Firefox!!

[419]

I.E. SUX!!

I.E. (IDIOTIC EXAMPLE?) SUX!!
EVER SINCE I 1st TRIED Mozilla FireFox, I SWEAR BY IT! UNCOMPARABLY FASTER, NO MORE SPY/AD/MAL WARE,AND JUST A BETTER BUILT BROWSER IN GENERAL.
THE ONLY TIME I USE I.E. NOW IS WHEN I LISTEN TO YAHOO JUKEBOX (Launchcast) BECAUSE ITs NOT COMPATIBLE WITH FIERFOX.
ON A DOWN NOTE THO, I PREFER OPERA BROWSER WHILE PLAYIN applet BASED GAMES, SUCH AS YAHOO HAS.......
BUT FOR EVERYTHING ELSE, ITs DEFFINATELY Mozilla Firefox!!