Safari (WebKit) passes acid3

[E6600]

You misunderstood me. The increase in IE7 isn't due to new users as much as it is, IE6 users upgrading to IE7, that why I don't care about the increase in IE7 users.
Safari and Konqueror are cross-platform, IE is Windows only, Windows has 90% of the PC market, and a lot of people don't even consider changing the default browser. Konqueror and Safari do come bundled in, but the market share of OS X and KDE is very very small compared to Windows.

[chedabob]

So what? It doesn't matter how it got there. What matters is that Safari and Opera are waaaaaay behind IE and Firefox. Safari is barely more popular than IE5. Doesn't that tell you something?

Stop making up excuses. Acid 3 counts for nothing, and the Mozilla devs know that. That's why they are seeking to improve their brwoser, instead of trying to seek approval from a small minority of users that need something to justify their browser choice.

[neowolf]

Originally Posted by chedabob

Safari doesn't count, it comes with OSX
Konqueror doesn't count, it comes with KDE.

Firefox doesn't count. It comes with most Linux distros.

[chedabob]

Originally Posted by neowolf

Firefox doesn't count. It comes with most Linux distros.

It's not the only browser though...

And it's not the default on KDE distros.

[neowolf]

Originally Posted by chedabob

It's not the only browser though...

And it's not the default on KDE distros.

But Gecko is the default on Gnome distros. If not in Firefox explicitly then in Epiphany. (Though that may change with Epiphany switching to have Gecko or Webkit as a backend.)

[E6600]

Originally Posted by chedabob

So what? It doesn't matter how it got there. What matters is that Safari and Opera are waaaaaay behind IE and Firefox. Safari is barely more popular than IE5. Doesn't that tell you something?

Stop making up excuses. Acid 3 counts for nothing, and the Mozilla devs know that. That's why they are seeking to improve their browser, instead of trying to seek approval from a small minority of users that need something to justify their browser choice.

If you hate Safari, then why not use Opera? Opera is an excellent browser Acid3 counts for a lot, go and research what Acid3 tests. I don't care how many people use <insert browser> I care about whether the browser adheres by web standards and how fast it renders web pages.
BTW, Firefox is the default browser on Ubuntu. I went through the trouble of installing KDE4 just to use the latest Konqueror on Ubuntu

[chedabob]

Originally Posted by neowolf

But Gecko is the default on Gnome distros. If not in Firefox explicitly then in Epiphany. (Though that may change with Epiphany switching to have Gecko or Webkit as a backend.)

It doesn't matter what rendering engine it uses. It's still not Firefox.

Originally Posted by E6600

If you hate Safari, then why not use Opera? Opera is an excellent browser Acid3 counts for a lot, go and research what Acid3 tests. I don't care how many people use <insert browser> I care about whether the browser adheres by web standards and how fast it renders web pages.
BTW, Firefox is the default browser on Ubuntu. I went through the trouble of installing KDE4 just to use the latest Konqueror on Ubuntu

Opera has even shittier plugin support than Safari.

I know what ACID3 tests. It's lots of crap that won't benefit the user. Acid 2 tested important things like the use of Javascript.

[E6600]

Originally Posted by chedabob

It doesn't matter what rendering engine it uses. It's still not Firefox.



Opera has even shittier plugin support than Safari.

I know what ACID3 tests. It's lots of crap that won't benefit the user. Acid 2 tested important things like the use of Javascript.

OK Acid2 is important, yet it took Mozilla and Microsoft 3 years to pass the test, whereas Safari, Opera and others passed it in late 2005 and early 2006!!

Acid3 is important, you are fooling yourself by believing otherwise

[neowolf]

Originally Posted by chedabob

It doesn't matter what rendering engine it uses. It's still not Firefox.

Opera has even shittier plugin support than Safari.

I know what ACID3 tests. It's lots of crap that won't benefit the user. Acid 2 tested important things like the use of Javascript.

Most Gecko browsers get counted together along with Firefox, since what really matters IS the rendering engine. Epiphany, Camino, Kmeleon, etc. The engine's what matters. The app's just your way of interacting with it.

That being said, this is a pretty silly argument. The ACID tests are mostly about testing for standards that AREN'T in heavy usage yet. The benefit of major browsers picking them up is that it encourages web developers to move on using newer technologies since they don't have to worry about them not working right as much. In that regard it's great when the major browsers do grab them, but it's not a pressing issue for the immediate browsing experience at all.

(In other words web browser developers SHOULD be working towards compliance, but if they have other things to worry about - it doesn't make sense for it to be a priority. Right now Firefox has been more concerned about getting back to being a shining example of performance. Something FF3 is very much right on track for too.)

[2pro4show]

Originally Posted by E6600

Safari > Konqueror > *

Quite simply, no.