
Firefox Now Scores 100% on Acid3 Test - twapi
http://browserfame.com/212/firefox-acid3-test-100
======
asadotzler
Firefox now scores 100 on Acid3 about 16 months ago.

~~~
arpitnext
ha ha.

acid3 has updated itself, firefox is right there.

~~~
nddrylliog
arpitnext, read before you respond stupidly.

Asa Dotzler is community coordinator for Mozilla, I think he knows what he's
talking about...

My interpretation is that 16 months ago, Firefox stopped caring about Acid3
because the remaining points were disagreements on how to interpret the
standard. Not because they were too lazy to fix it, because they had a point.

The fact that it has been resolved only now is irrelevant. If you take a
Firefox 16 months old and run Acid3 on it now, it would score 100% - I think
that's what he meant.

~~~
arpitnext
Dear nddrylliog,

AFAIK, Firefox has not introduced any change in order to score 100% on Acid3.
If you read this article (<http://browserfame.com/212/firefox-
acid3-test-100>), you will come to know that the developer of Acid3 test has
introduced few changes in order to "update" the test. On the updated Acid3
scale, Firefox scores 100%. This simply indicates that Mozilla was correct!

I agree with you: "If you take a Firefox 16 months old and run Acid3 on it
now, it would score 100% - I think that's what he meant.".

I am unable to understand your comment: "read before you respond stupidly.".
Can you please explain my stupidity?

(FYI: I am also associated with Mozilla for long, as a volunteer.)

~~~
nddrylliog
Oh well, here come the downvotes because I have been harsh. Woop de doo.

Yes, you're just repeating my (and pretty much everyone's) point here. Your
stupidity was only to contradict Asa there, that's all.

~~~
starwed
You're doing that thing people do one the internet, when they see a
disagreement that doesn't exist.

The poster wasn't contradicting asa at all, he was (a) laughing at asa's joke,
and (b) trying to make his own.

Downvote him if you like for not contributing to the discussion, but your
particular comment seemed completely unrelated to the content of his post.

~~~
nddrylliog
And the downvote dance continues :) Not that I give a shit though, HN has
continuously been going down the toilet for the last few years now.

Now it's mostly fanboyism, self-congratulation, oh and gratuitious downvotes
without even reading or understanding people's posts.

Also, yeah, know even if Asa's was a half-joke, arpitnext's post was not a
joke. Well, back to doing useful stuff now.

~~~
asomiv
I upvoted you. Not because I think what you said is insightful, but because
your post serves as a textbook example of a person who not only doesn't see
how stupid and trollish his own post is, but also dismisses all forms of legit
criticism as fanboyism.

~~~
libraryatnight
Oh and don't forget he's ranting about how this site is going down hill while
contributing nothing and pretty much making this piece of the thread
unpleasant.

~~~
nddrylliog
Yeah you're right, don't go to my comment history to judge whether I'm
actually making useful contributions to HN.

I mean, surely 2-3 poorly written comments are enough to judge a few years of
contributions. Bah.

------
alastair
Safari on my iPad got 100/100, but there was a small glitched box (bottom
right) not on the reference page so it's obviously not a perfect test.

~~~
azakai
To fully pass the test you need to get 100/100, _and_ for the animation to be
smooth and the generated image to have the proper appearance. It is a little
confusing that the test doesn't automatically check the other two things.

~~~
owenmarshall
I can't think of any browser facility that would be able to verify the
animation and final generated appearance. How would you do that?

~~~
azakai
Yeah, I don't think it's possible. But it is confusing that it isn't possible
and therefore isn't done in this test.

~~~
jellicle
Have browser send screenshot to Mechanical Turk and offer 1 cent for the
answer to the question: "Is this image identical to this image?" :)

FWIW, my Firefox 6.0.2 gets 100/100 but the resulting image does NOT look,
pixel-for-pixel, identical to the reference image. Ah, but I guess it's only
required for default settings, so perhaps that is the problem - non-default
settings on my end.

~~~
rorrr
I'm pretty sure there's no way for a browser to take a screenshot of itself.

~~~
simonbrown
It's possible, but not perfect.

<http://html2canvas.hertzen.com/>

~~~
rorrr
It's a subset of HTML and CSS, not the whole thing. Interesting though.

------
davux
IE9 on Windows 7 and IE9 on Windows Phone Mango (7712) also score 100% now.

------
mscarborough
Good news for sure, but the Mozilla Foundation has let the plugin updates vs
supported plugins issue get away.

Firebug, YSlow, Web Developer and others don't work with the new version? OK
fine but tell me first.

I reluctantly upgraded from FF 3.6 as FF has been my go-to development browser
for years, but plugins I need to get work done kept breaking or were not
installable to the FF version that FF thought I should have.

~~~
mbrubeck
Are you running a beta version? Firebug, YSlow, and Web Developer are all
compatible with the latest release version (Firefox 6):

<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/yslow/>

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/web-
developer...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/web-developer/)

<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/firebug/>

If you installed them from addons.mozilla.org then you should get
compatibility updates automatically and silently. If you installed them from
elsewhere, you may need to check for updates manually (or switch to the a.m.o
versions). In general, all add-ons hosted at a.m.o are updated to support new
versions automatically: [http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2011/04/19/add-on-
compatibili...](http://blog.mozilla.com/addons/2011/04/19/add-on-
compatibility-rapid-releases/)

We do still have a lot of work to do to improve add-on compatibility for non-
AMO-hosted extensions. The next planned step is to bundle something like Addon
Compatibility Reported into Firefox itself.

------
bsiemon
Chrome dev channel appears to get 100/100. There are a few odd things that
flicker as it goes. It would be cool to see a play by play of the whole test.

~~~
listic
Chrome Stable gets 100/100 too, and has been for quite some time. However, the
final page didn't look exactly like the reference rendering. Now it does.

------
ck2
Nice. When will I be able to work in one tab without another able to slow it
to a stop?

------
yaix
FF beta on Android 100/100.

------
neozhang
Meh.

------
hackermom
Last one in the bunch, even later than IE9, but something good nevertheless.
Funny point in the article: FF passes the test not because of changes to FF,
but because of changes to the Acid test :)

~~~
51Cards
I seem to remember an article awhile back where someone from Mozilla wrote
that they didn't care to make up the last X% of the test because (if I recall
correctly) they didn't agree with the interpretation of the standards that
made up the tiny bit they were failing on. They felt they were keeping true to
the actual spec and that the Acid was incorrect and thus it was silly to
conform just to get that 100/100. I may be mistaken but perhaps the Acid test
has now come into line with whatever spec items they were disputing. IF this
is the case then my kudos to the Mozilla team for not "conforming" just to
conform.

Edit: found the link: <http://limi.net/articles/firefox-acid3/> So it was not
wanting to put in partial implementations when a final spec wasn't complete
yet just to pass a test.

Edit again: Even Firefox 3.6 now scores a 99/100

~~~
josefresco
This is great and all for Mozilla, but the team at MS working on IE didn't
have this _luxury_. If they took a plublic stance against an aspect of the
test (even if completely legitimate) they would be ridiculed by the tech
press.

~~~
eggnet
It is not a luxury, it is a benefit of the credibility Mozilla has worked hard
over many years to build.

------
Samuel_Michon
Apparently, what's good enough for American education is good enough for
grading web browsers: if your pupils aren't learning, give them easier tests.

It's still a misleading headline, though.

~~~
azakai
The test itself was misleading, and has now been updated to better reflect
reality.

In your analogy, it would be as if pupils were given tests with some
irrelevant questions, and the tests later revised to focus just on proper
subject material.

~~~
william42
I thought the point of the Acid tests weren't to reflect reality but to
encourage web developers to support useful but unsupported parts of the
standards.

~~~
Shabaz
Firefox's arguments for not really bothering with the remaining parts of Acid3
was that it seemed like it they weren't testing particularly relevant
standards and that the implementations of the other browsers for those
standards were mostly to pass Acid3 and not particularly useful either. See
<http://limi.net/articles/firefox-acid3/> for more info.

That seems like valid reasoning to me. I've also seen Hixie make comments that
seem to indicate him wanting to avoid these issues for any potential Acid4:

 _When we do Acid4 (probably around the time we have at least three major
browsers shipping Acid3-passing browsers), I think we'll have to focus on
testing fewer, more critical things. Acid3 tests a lot of critical stuff, but
also checks a lot of less important stuff at the same time, and it's in those
areas that we've had the most problems with specs changing under us._

From
[http://ln.hixie.ch/?count=1&start=1215829569](http://ln.hixie.ch/?count=1&start=1215829569)

