Microsoft defends against IE8’s Acid3 failure

Robert Hallock (Thrax)

March 25, 2009 10:18 AM ET in News, , , , , , , , , , ,

iexplorer8Microsoft has come out to defend against criticisms leveled at the new Internet Explorer 8 for failing to pass the Acid3 test. Microsoft asserts that they did not bake support for the test into IE8 because the standards in the Acid3 test are not yet finalized by the W3C.

Nick Hodge of Microsoft Australia explains Microsoft’s decision was based on experiences with IE6.

“The concern Microsoft has is that if we burnt [draft standards] into Internet Explorer 8 and passed Acid3 with 120 percent and then deploy it on so many machines, especially in the enterprise, [we have made draft standards de-facto standards] when the W3C will then want to innovate on the [evolving] standards,” he said. “Our learning comes from IE6. With IE6 we adopted some non-recommended standards and interpreted them in a certain way. The end result of that has been painful web development.”

Stephen Collins of Acid Labs, the firm behind the Acid tests, doesn’t buy Microsoft’s explanation. “Other browsers pass Acid3. [Microsoft has] had more than enough time with IE8, so it should pass too,” Collins said.

IE8’s 21/100 score weighs in against that of Chrome and Safari with 100/100, and Firefox 3.0 with 71/100.

20 Comments:

  1. MiracleManS
    25 Mar '09, 2:23 pm

    I guess I can understand some of the trepidation, but the ability of MS to consistently update the rendering engine of IE leads me to cringe at the idea of waiting another 5 years for something thats better.

  2. Thrax
    25 Mar '09, 2:25 pm

    I can see Acid Labs' logic, and I can see Microsoft's logic. I think 802.11n proves what can happen when an industry runs away with a draft spec.

  3. Lincoln
    25 Mar '09, 2:31 pm

    The Acid3 test is a bunch of bullshit propaganda at this stage. IE8 is the first IE iteration to pass Acid2 and all the sudden they're a bunch of assholes for not passing Acid3 already? Please.

    //edit: redirected comment @Acid3 specifically

  4. Lincoln
    25 Mar '09, 2:40 pm

    I mean, seriously, can we not just praise the IE team for once? They finally put out a kick-ass, standards-compliant browser (which some people in their own company did not want) that passes Acid2 and doesn't require any hacks... and the news of the day is how it doesn't pass an arbitrary test that Ian invented after IE8 was already half-baked.

  5. MiracleManS
    25 Mar '09, 3:15 pm

    I'm not dismissing the significance of IE8, its a GIGANTIC, HUGE, MONUMENTAL step in the right direction. But the fact that IE has such a slow development cycle with regard to rendering engine updates, I'm worried about the future.

  6. Cliff_Forster
    25 Mar '09, 3:31 pm

    I have not given IE8 a test drive as of yet, and generally speaking I would not so much as considerd it, but the buzz I have seen is 90% positive, so I am inclined to download it and give it a go over the next couple of days.

    To most end users, Acid3 will matter very little. Ultimately a browsers performance comes down to three basic things, will it access and allow me to do what I want? Will it run stable and quick on my machine? Most importantly for Microsoft, is it secure?

    Most folks wont care what set of standards you measure it against, if enough users can answer yes to those three questions, Microsoft will have a winner, especially coming from their position.

  7. Lincoln
    25 Mar '09, 3:52 pm

    MMS, the time between IE7 and IE8 was 2.5 years, not 5. And, honestly, the leaps from 6->7 and 7->8 were a lot more painful than the iterative releases I'd expect in the future. The difference between Acid1 and Acid2 can break most websites. The differences between Acid2 and Acid3 are important for high-power web apps like Google Docs, not to everyday web dev work.

  8. MiracleManS
    25 Mar '09, 4:30 pm

    Well, I'm talking more of the distance between 6 and 8. 7, while fun and all (and a huge step up from 6), was not as great a step as 7 to 8. I can think of several things 7 still doesn't handle well (looking at you normal everyday javascript). Not only that, but 6 still holds a significant market share and thats disturbing.

  9. Lincoln
    25 Mar '09, 5:12 pm

    I disagree. I think the step from 6 to 7 was equal-to or greater-than the step from 7 to 8. Not only did it more fundamentally change its rendering engine, it also poked a 5-years-complacent business IT community. IE7 hacks pale in comparison to IE6 hacks.

  10. MiracleManS
    25 Mar '09, 5:29 pm

    Could be I just refuse to do anything for IE6 anymore...but still.

  11. Lincoln
    25 Mar '09, 5:38 pm

    I'm on the same level - Icrontic looks like crap in IE6. I'm saying let's not forget what a huge step that was though. It was so huge we can't even be bothered with it anymore.

  12. jared
    25 Mar '09, 5:59 pm
    Quoting Lincoln

    The Acid3 test is a bunch of bullshit propaganda at this stage. IE8 is the first IE iteration to pass Acid2 and all the sudden they're a bunch of assholes for not passing Acid3 already? Please.

    //edit: redirected comment @Acid3 specifically

    [...]

    I mean, seriously, can we not just praise the IE team for once? They finally put out a kick-ass, standards-compliant browser (which some people in their own company did not want) that passes Acid2 and doesn't require any hacks... and the news of the day is how it doesn't pass an arbitrary test that Ian invented after IE8 was already half-baked.

    QFT. Couldn't agree more. Acid3 is the least of our worries right now.

  13. Thrax
    25 Mar '09, 6:01 pm

    I agree with Microsoft on this one. Yeah, it would be spanky if IE8 passed the current version of Acid3 with flying colors, but this very sentence points out the problem. "Current version." It's a damn draft specification. Let's talk about compliance when everyone has agreed on what Acid3 should include... They haven't yet.

  14. GooD
    25 Mar '09, 6:20 pm

    I've Never heard of Acid2 and 3 before reading this thread, its funny lol

  15. Lincoln
    25 Mar '09, 6:46 pm

    We could talk about how IE's supported paged media since 5.5, while Webkit and Gecko STILL haven't gotten around to it. Or that page-break-inside finally works in IE8. The only other browser that gem works in is Opera, and it's REALLY relevant to my line of work (web dev for a printer). Trying to control what a browser prints out (besides IE8 & Opera) is a GIGANTIC PITA.

    If it doesn't pass Acid3... oh no, use Prototype and you're done. With Javascript rending speed increasing by orders of magnitude there's lots of options for JS workarounds. CSS 2.1 is a far better benchmark of who's who in the standards competition, and IE8 just walked away with that crown as far as I'm concerned.

    (Note to self: increase size of comment box on front page)

  16. MiracleManS
    25 Mar '09, 6:58 pm

    Note to Linc: If you use chrome you can resize it!

  17. Zuntar
    26 Mar '09, 12:46 pm

    All this talk makes me really want to give IE8 a serious try. Unfortunately our IT guys won't update to it...Corporate paranoia.

  18. Lincoln
    26 Mar '09, 1:24 pm

    I'd have greater paranoia about not upgrading.

  19. MiracleManS
    26 Mar '09, 2:36 pm

    BUT OMG MY ACTIVEX GOODNESSINTRANETSTUFF WON'T work

  20. PapaRaboon
    1 Apr '09, 12:51 am

    I guess the question should be. Are Microsoft working to pass tv Acid 3 test and release an update to IE8 when the new standards pass the draft stage at the w3c? Or will we have to wait another 6 years to be able to use all of the new goodies on our sites already being supported by other browsers now?

    Seems to me that they are just trying to put up a final show of strength.

    Also with the sheer number of corporate IT departments refusing to upgrade from IE6, Microsoft have done the damage. Even if it is indirectly!

Troll-free since 2003 ®