It doesn't really. It's far closer to saying IE9 may be fine but they need to pay penance for past crimes.
Surely the approach is do bad things, we punish you, do good things, we reward you? IE9 and IE10 are, broadly speaking, good things. To continue to punish MS for them looks a little emotional at best, petulant at worst.
But surely the real decision should be what is right for the individual business? Different companies have different user profiles using different browsers.
This whole decision should be an unemotional one based on resources, customers, revenue and profit.
It is absolutely something that each business will need to work out for themselves.
What I am getting at is that just because IE10 is falling in line as far as standards go that doesn't magically earn back all the trust they have spent years destroying. A track record is something that is hard to shake weather it is good or bad, so I am just saying that it is going to take some time...
Losing trust in someone and punishing them are two different things. It's fair to say you don't immediately trust someone who has shown bad behavior over a long period of time just because their recent behavior seems improved. Trust happens over time.
