Slashdot Mirror
Acid3 Race In Full Swing, Opera Overtakes Safari
enemi writes "Just a few days after Safari released version 3.1, Opera employee David Storey writes on his blog that they've overtaken Apple's browser in the Acid3 test. In the race to be the first to reach the reference rendering, Opera's software leads now with 98%, closely following by Safari with 96% and Firefox 3 beta 4 with 71%. He also noted the implemented features will not make a public appearance in the following weeks, because they are getting close to releasing Opera 9.5. That version has been under public testing since September and the new CSS3 color modes and font rendering features might further delay this. They will probably show the score in a preview build soon and wait for a post 9.5 stable build to release the new features to the public." Update: 03/26 21:21 GMT by Z : Opera is now at 100%, apparently, with Safari close behind at 98%.
Update: 03/27 by J : Public build r31356 of WebKit (Safari's rendering engine) is at 100%.
'nuff said.
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2008/03/26/opera-and-the-acid3-test opera wins
My just-updated Safari (3.1) keels over at 77%.
What version is getting 96%?
Shiny. Let's be bad guys.
Newer builds pass with 100% http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2008/03/26/opera-and-the-acid3-test
Chances are any disscution on Slashdot will degrade into a flamewar about ID/Christianity within 14 posts.
Actually, as of today, Safari is also at 98/100. See today's entry in the WebKit blog for more.
R.Mo
Either way, it's us punters who are enjoying the fruits of this competition :-)
The Mothership
The opera Desktop Dev blog claims full compliance now. http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2008/03/26/opera-and-the-acid3-test
With Firefox 2.0.0.13 I've been doing just find rendering the render image properly!
http://acid3.acidtests.org/reference.html
Which is a better title: "First browser to reach 100/100" or "First publicly-released browser to reach 100/100"? I might argue for the latter. If anything, I think this gives the WebKit team more of a spark to reach the end.
The whole competition is pointless - we all know IE8 will be the clear winner. Its ok, I couldn't read that with a straight face either.
Okay, So Opera Firefox and Safari all are shooting for compliance with Acid3.
The next major milestone though, right after "X Achieves 100% compatibility in nightly builds" is "X releases version X of browser to the masses/into the wild, capable of passing Acid3 test".
Passing it "in the lab" is one thing, declaring it in a build "ready for release" is another.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
I love to see this competition to meet standards. We all win when this happens.
Although one could argue that any time a product deviates from the standard it should be logged as a bug.
Im a gamer, not a grammer major. This post is full of spelling and grammer mistakes.
You know, anybody can simply go to the reference page and just remove reference.html from the URL visible in the address bar. Voila, perfect screen shot. Pretty convenient that Opera's claim is not 3rd party verifiable.
how pathetic. phewwww
... and get Acid 4 ready.
This isn't a race, it's a competition.
What do I care who's first? What I care about is who has the best browser that complies with standards. That may also include render speed, stability, javascript compatibility, security, or whatever. "Who's first" is about the thing I care about the least.
AccountKiller
It is awesome that web standards are being fully embraced by important browser vendors.
Although this "competition for standards compliance" is a huge leap forward for the industry, we should give accolades only to those who have delivered production software products, versus those who say they will based on numbers that they see within their non-production builds.
Because in the end, the services that my organization delivers like quality browsers in the hands of real users.
This is getting like the old 3D Mark pissing competition that was around a few years ago. I just hope it's being implemented properly, and not using some "optimisations" just for that page.
So because it gets more points that Safari, it is vaporware?
Tag system got disabled for me today.
Opera is now 100% & Apple is back to 2nd place (they should be use to that position by now).
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Not to be a nitpick, but saying "Opera's software leads now with 98%, closely following by Safari with 96% and Firefox 3 beta 4 with 71%" is like saying "Car A reaches 274 km/h, closely followed by car B with 268 km/h and car C with 198 km/h".
I like Firefox more than Opera or Safari, but saying that 98% is "closely followed" by 96 AND 71% is just stupid. The fact that IE is worse is not a justification.
... until the Opera development team decides to finally implement the onbeforeunload event.
Without that, it makes stateful Ajax techniques too risky to deploy on Opera.
Microsoft came up with it, and eventually Mozilla caved in
and added it because it was useful, despite its Microsoft origins.
The Opera guys, OTOH, still insist Opera doesn't need it.
Geez. Norwegians must be almost as stubborn as Finns.
Update: 03/26 21:21 GMT by Z : Safari is now at 100%, apparently, with Safari close behind at 98%.
Looks like someone wasn't reading what they were writing. The links are right though.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Hello? Firefox developers, where are you? You already have a reputation for being sluggish. Why sit back and prove it every time? Is gecko so poorly engineered that it's really hard to fix? Or does nobody care about the actual page rendering side of the web browser? Either way is really bad for firefox's future.
So there.
I bet Safari is in third as well. Love that preview button!
The articles update says that Safari has 100% and Safari has 98%.
Can you spot the problem?
Zonk writes: "Update: 03/26 21:21 GMT by Z : Safari is now at 100%, apparently, with Safari close behind at 98%."
The first "Safari" was linked to Opera, but unless you mouse over it, it's definitely confusing.
Zonk, next time, try to use the preview button.
Dependency hell? =>
RDF
It should say Opera...
We already know why IE7 is behind but what makes Firefox lag behind Safari and Opera with this? Does it all come down to browser share = slow progress? Or could it be that Opera and Safari are putting other projects behind to pass the Acid3 test?
"During My Service In The United States Congress, I Took The Initiative In Creating The Internet." -Al Gore
Seamonkey 1.1.8 on linux *not* for the win! 52 out of 100. But I bet it still beats Mississippi and Zimbabwe!
Hello, .. don't even bother with the moz box..
As a web developer I'dd like to say that I simply don't give a shit about any browser passing the acid tests.
Unfortunetly I've been stucked with some wordpress themes lately, and I got yet another bitter taste about how different can browsers behave. A day after IE8 has been released, I installed and tested a theme I created that used no IE specific hacks whatsoever, however on IE8 had a small glitch - small but very annoying - yes, it rendered identical on every other browser - ie6,7, safari, firefox, opera. The other day, I've done yet another theme - again no ie conditional css. Safari (even 3.1) rendered the layout wrong. Suffice to say that Konqueror, like every other browser rendered it right. So yeah, I just don't give shit, about any test browser developers brag about. I simply want to be able to use inline-block and many other not-so-new css properties, that one browser managed to screw up.
In case you're wondering inline-block is not rendered properly by firefox, and it won't be until 3.0. Yeah, -moz-inline-block, might work but not ALWAYS!
Anyway, as stated above I'm not really excited about any of this. I'm just wondering wich very cool(useful, timesaving) css3 property will be crippled for the next 5 years.
Yeah, I said it. I'm actually praying for IE8 to be standards compliant as much as possible, and this is coming from a Linux junkie.
Why? Simple; we still can't deny the fact that better than 9/10 of the unwashed masses out there are still paying homage to the Microsoft/Internet Explorer gods. They always have and this, in turn, has always meant that 98% of the browsers visiting a website are going to be IE; this also means that all the authors of these sites are always going to code to specifications that work with IE. If IE is broken in how it renders websites and requires a bunch of HTML and CSS hacks to get things looking right then that same 98% of websites won't render properly in other, more standards-compliant browsers (Opera, Firefox, anything using WebKit, et al).
But, if IE8 defaults to a standards-compliant mode then those same 98% of IE users will eventually force the devs to start coding their sites to standards. This is a case where everybody wins; just like IE's massive user base helped "break" the web, this is a case where that same massive user base can actually force authors to fix their crap (just like we alternative browser users wanted them to do all along).This space for rent!
The problem with races is that the teams do almost anything just to cross the finish line faster. The speed at which the browsers seem to be gaining acid3 compatibility is frankly worrying me. Any developer worth his salt knows that browsers are huge and complex applications and every change must be discussed, designed and implemented properly as to not impact something else and be modular, be properly commented and be clean and well written code.
Also, Acid3 is just about the corner cases, and might not reflect the full standard completely. So a browser can pass the test and still suck at implementing standards, though passing the test is good step. It's just that the high speed of the compatibility improvements for ACID3 in almost all the mainstream browsers screams of hackathon coding sessions to get those few points a day till 100 so that there can be a marketing and PR blitz rather than properly planned programming. I think there is a very good chance of the code containing hacks and workarounds and also tons of security loopholes because of the insane speed at which features are being thrown into the code.
I think there is a very good chance of the new code containing hacks and workarounds and also tons of security loopholes because of the insane speed at which 'features' are being thrown into the code just to make headlines. Being a programmer, I am sure that non-trivial portions of the code will have to be rewritten later. Haste makes waste.
This space for rent.
However, this falls into the "Firefox does Acid 2" category. Until this is done with the release version of the browser, it's a nice thing, but not really available to the average web user. (Cue the witticisms from the "hyuck, hyuck - well Opera users aren't average - either of them" crowd.)
This is a good thing. Opera has been a company which has been dedicated to (among other things like speed, security and innovations in the interface) support for web standards. This is just another step in that direction.
Kudos to the desktop crew for this accomplishment.
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
This is really cool that competition has provoked a response from the browsers to be compliant, but until IE is compliant, does it make a lick of difference? The combined market share of these ACID3 browsers is ~25%, so in the scheme of things, I'm still not going to be developing sites that take advantage of the newest features.
IE8 is still puttering around with ACID2...so I hate to sound like the cynic...
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
Err.... Safari is at 100% with safari close behind at 98%? Think one safari too many
Question is which one is opera and which is safari - and does it really matter?
How many sites out there will only work with Acid3 compliant browsers? I'd guess... 1 - the test site itself. Even if other sites look better with 100% compliance I doubt if the entire site will be unusable or so poorly rendered as to be unusable.
Bragging rights in this game is like boasting of having a car that can do 150 while your mate's can only do 145 - bloody pointless as those speeds are only any good on a race track, on a dry day, with a driver who knows how to get the last mph out of their car... most people won't notice the 5mph difference.
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
... But what I want to know is if reaching a perfect score necessarily means that the implementations are sound.
... the recently discovered flaws in Win32 Safari spring to mind.
Maybe some quick and dirty code was used that in the end wont prove stable, safe,
It just strike me as odd that Acid 2 compliance took so long as opposed to what we are seeing now with acid 3.
Update: 03/26 21:21 GMT by Z : Safari is now at 100%, apparently, with Safari close behind at 98%. Hunh? Typo!
Need an automatic screenshot taker? Try here.
If this were news about IE, I'd care. If it were news about Firefox, I'd care. Since I'm a Mac user, if it were news about Safari I'd probably care, at least a little (although I use Firefox). But Opera? I don't even test my stuff against that browser - it's just never been particularly relevant.
Now, I realize that Opera zealotry is as fervent as the worst Mac fans, and loses nothing to the Nikon/Canon camps; but really - the installed base is tiny. When I look at my site stats, Opera doesn't even show up (and even Netscape 4.x still has a tiny sliver of the pie). So I'm not sure even the "competition is good for everyone" argument particularly applies here.
#DeleteChrome
I'm very happy to see both Safari and Opera take the Acid3 test so seriously. However, despite Safari's 98/100 score, I still have problems with Midas/DocumentMode issues. This affects the basic installation of TinyMCE, an extremely popular editor for blogging software. It is used in Confluence, Joomla, Mambo, and many other software projects.
I also know there are places where Safari simply renders pages illegibly. I've seen this on Joomla forums where Safari cannot render the boxes on top of a forum post correctly (see for an example. Here "home", "threaded views", "home", and "help" are not rendered correctly in Safari.
I know most of this has to do with non-standard behavior first instituted by Microsoft (who else), but IE represents about 80% of the browser market, so when Microsoft creates a standard like Midas/DocumentMode, it becomes an important part of the Web. FireFox and Opera have no problems with this. Unfortunately, Safari, the browser that hews so closely to WC3 standards simply cannot be used on many websites.
Because, until corporations get rid of all the crappy code they've written that requires ActiveX which is IE only (ACID or not ACID), there's still a real hook to use IE.
Wow, the Safari team should be ashamed. Instead of specifically testing for the Acid 3 test, they are specifically testing for a webfont that Acid 3 uses.
I've seen a lot of people make jokes about (usually IE) behaving differently if it detected the Acid 2 test, and I thought it was ridiculous to imagine that anybody would ever actually do that. But now I see that Apple really is doing it.
Shit like this is not going to help the web in the least.
You can develop for whatever target you want. That doesn't change the fact that many people on slashdot will want to install/use an ACID3 browser, which is why this is news for nerds. Plus it can potentially give geeks bragging rights about their favorite browser. It doesn't have to be popular to be your favorite.
:)
Not everyone on slashdot is a web developer. Some of us actually consider browsers to be tools for browsing teh Intarweb.
(Beyond that, some of us develop sites for use by Linux users, and could give a rat's ass what IE's overall market share is when our users are 75-99% non-IE.)
Your point is well taken for that fraction of slashdot users that develop commercial mainstream websites, though. But then any commercial mainstream web developers who have to be told that IE is their primary target are probably too stupid to survive much longer anyway.
The only that i would like to say is that Acid3 nuked really fast.
At least the Acid2 ghosted the browser market for at least 2 years (correct me if i am wrong).
Acid3 passed in a less that a month.
It seems at last that the Acid3 wasn't so hard at all. Someone didn't do really good job (kidding).
Remember the days when websites would yell at you telling you that you needed to use a certain version of an OS, with a certain version of a certain browser, with the latest pre-alpha VRML plugin and 1024x768 resolution?
Now, you don't even need a computer to browse the web.
That is progress.
I use Safari at home and Firefox at work (both with flash blockers), and I can do anything.
Back when Microsoft tried to take over the web, I had many issues with many sites. I don't remember the last problem I've had viewing a website.
And this is without government regulation or anything.
Next up, standards for multimedia on the web.
The speed at which the browsers seem to be gaining acid3 compatibility is frankly worrying me.
Some people are just NEVER satisfied... :)
you had me at #!
And then there's Safari, whose rendering engine is open source. I don't think it has anything to do with closed source.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
The "zealotry" is answer to unfair dissing of Opera. The company is working really hard on their browser and promotion of web standards, and yet from the general public all they get is "x%? I don't give a shit".
In the US the browser alone might not be directly relevant, but Opera Software influenced the market quite a bit: IE8 was released soon after Opera filed complaint to EU and IE8's big news is passing Opera CTO's Acid2 test. Opera taken lead role in WHATWG and started implementing [X]HTML5. Before that W3C didn't consider any major revisions of HTML4 or XHTML1.
They really deserve some more respect.
True. It's only Firefox that sucks.
Please give me a STABLE 64-bit build for Linux (.deb preferable) and a public bug-tracker.
-one-who-wants-to-stop-using-firefox-and-thinks-konqueror-sucks-without-webkit
Safari 3.1's only getting 75% here
I'd say the antitrust case, even though just a slap on the wrist, did slow MS down and that is one of the reasons that the internet has improved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
http://webkit.org/blog/173/webkit-achieves-acid3-100100-in-public-build/
http://webkit.org/blog/173/webkit-achieves-acid3-100100-in-public-build/
myselfmusic
I think Apple deserve some credit here. When 'problem' websites were reported to them, they seem to have done some very effective outreach work with webmasters, as well as fixing their own bugs.
Could someone explain how the reference rendering is done in the first place? If none of the current generation of browsers actually render the test correctly, how can the test makers be 100% sure that the "reference rendering" is correct to begin with? My best guess was intensive code checking, but with no "reference browser" to test the test itself against, what is there to stop the test itself from being wrong?
Since Opera can identify itself as IE or another browser and, many people set it to be IE to get sites to let it operate, it is hard to get an accurate measure of the browser's position in the market.
Banjo - The more I know about Windoze, the more I love *nix
There was a bug in the Acid3 test suite. That bug prevented WebKit from getting a 100/100 score. Now, that the bug is fixed, WebKit is scoring 100/100. How Opera could have scored 100/100 before the test was fixed is beyond me.
What's more, since WebKit is released nightly, WebKit is the first publicly released browser to score 100/100 on the Acid 3 tests.
BTW, as both teams will point out, scoring 100/100 on the Acid3 test doesn't mean the browser "passed" the Acid3 test. It has to match the reference page pixel for pixel and its rendering has to be smooth. Opera is off by a couple of pixels in its rendering. WebKit is pixel-perfect, but Test 26 takes too long to complete.
And, Opera could still be the first officially released non-beta browser to score 100/100 on the Acid3 test.
Back when Microsoft tried to take over the web, I had many issues with many sites. I don't remember the last problem I've had viewing a website.
Well, as a counterexample Fedex just updated their on-line shipping site and it pops up with an "Error Window" stating that Opera is not a supported browser. The last version elicited no such negative response. Opera seems to work just fine with the Fedex site, but I think Fedex is moving in the wrong direction by being more picky rather than less. And yes, I know you can configure Opera to spoof another browser so the error window doesn't pop up, but that's not the point.
No way! Safari is in front of Safari!
What are you - a Safari hater?
Safari! Safari! Safari!
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
The WebKit folks have scored 100/100 on the test. But in the process of making WebKit conform, they found a bug in the test itself that would have forced a violation of the SVG standard to pass, so it wasn't possible to get a valid 100/100 on the test. That renders Opera's score invalid, and they're back to 99/100.
According to the WebKit people, though, this doesn't actually mean they've passed because the animation may not be as smooth as it's supposed to be. But the rendering itself matches the reference rendering perfectly.
http://trac.webkit.org/projects/webkit/changeset/31322
http://brandonbloom.name
Webkit (Safari's engine) has hit the 100% mark, but as they themselves point out the animation "smoothness" ain't there just yet.
I don't consider the smoothness to be a critical thing personally, but the test designers do (and it's something I can understand -- you don't want one browser rendering beautiful and smooth while another is jerking and jumping all over the place).
Ignoring the whole debate over whether Opera's "100%" is valid and what it means to be a "released browser" that hits 100%, I'm still waiting for a pass that meets the full spirit of the test - Full rendering compliance & full animation smoothness - THAT (imho) is what is going to decide who won the race to pass ACID 3.
/~mikeg
As an iPhone guy I've got one nagging question -- When will we see a mobile browser that passes ACID 3 (and is it even possible with today's mobile hardware?)
Currently Mobile Safari chokes on ACID 3, and I think this is as much a deficiency of the hardware (not enough CPU power/RAM?) as it is of the rendering engine.
Any mobile platform experts care to weigh in on this one? I know at least one of the ACID 3 tests is a "performance" test, so do you think it's possible to get acceptable performance out of mobile hardware?
/~mikeg
I just downloaded the Safari nightly, it gets 100, I see no jerkiness - it is silky smooth (I do have a Mac Pro though), the rendering is EXACT.
From where I am looking, and with what I am looking at Webkit/Safari is the clear AVAILABLE winner....
Umm.. Since around 11PM tonight (if not earlier), Safari has gotten 100/100.
Proof at: http://box.jaredbinder.com:443/acid3.swf
As many people above me have been pointing out, it appears WebKit, not Opera, is actually the first to score a 100/100 on the Acid3 test and also is the first to get a pixel-perfect rendering.
From Ian Hickson's blog (editor of the Acid3 test): "Just as Reddit is celebrating Opera reaching 100/100, with the misleading headline Opera the first browser to pass the Acid3 test (hey, submitter: it wouldn't hurt to read the Opera blog post before submitting it to Reddit), the Apple guys track me down and point out that there's yet another bug in the test. With heycam's help, we have now fixed the test. Again. This presumably means Opera is now at 99/100... the race continues!"
Also, as of at least 6:55pm on Wednesday (going by the Surfin' Safari blog, build r31356), Safari scores a 100/100 on the Acid3 test as well as having a pixel-perfect rendering. This doesn't count as a full pass yet though, as test 26, which is a performance test, is still taking too long (although it appears WebKit also has the fastest implemntation of that). Many people are reporting that on fast machines the test still renders smoothly, which is a bit subjective.
At the end of the day though Acid3 is still going to be relevant for quite a long time, as both Firefox and IE still have some work to do before passing it. Firefox is a ways ahead although has some SVG issues that might delay a full pass, and IE, well... IE is IE.
When I reported a (fairly serious) issue with Safari on my new calculation project website, it was fixed within a couple of weeks. I don't really know if it had anything to do with my report, but I like to dream...
Quit jacking off over who's passed an unfinished test based on unfinalized standards and just give me a browser that makes my favorite sites usable.
Oh wait, I'm using Firefox 2 and it already does that. Sure, I can't even pass Acid2, much less Acid3, but who cares? Unlike most of the people in this thread, my browsing experience is in no way diminished by an inability to see the Acid2 smiley face.
Is that the rendering engine for firefox Win and firefox on apple?
Especially when you consider IE, also closed source, which is still barely passing acid2 in beta versions, and still gets less than 20% on acid3.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
...does it do *Acid4* !?
.... somebody telling me he does not fancy serving 25% of our potential costumers.
:-P
Wish that when I find a new job is not as your boss
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Opera is finding its way into mobile devices, where it is a major player.
...
It you are not catering to mobile users, you may be missing the next gravy train
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Heh, I got curious about the acid3 test and ran it on my updated ubuntu opera 9.26
It allways crashes around the 30s/100
Suck it!
-Avid Opera User
So now that we have 100% Acid3 compliance, we can really see how badly all those web designers have f*****d up over the last 15 years. Is it just me, or do you prefer seeing the web looking "nice" or looking compliant ? Because for me, Opera even at 9.0 still made a complete mess of hyperlinks, overlaying a vertical column of links with the CSS coloured text-background of the previous one. He just can't seem to get font heights worked out :-(
opera99, safari100...please won't someone tag this fortran77?
which is totally what she said
"Yeah, Opera can do it" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26, @05:23PM (#22874326) Yes, they can & HAVE: OPERA PASSES ACID3 TEST FIRST:
.9841!)
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2008/03/26/opera-and-the-acid3-test
AND, Opera's fsster than its competitors, OVERALL on the most OS platforms (since it is multiplatform, like FF but NOT IE (or as uch so in IE that is, since it runs on MacOS X too, but NOT Linux/*NIX (even on Javascript processing too (as well as commonly being accepted as "the world's fastest webbrowser program" in Opera, on ALL/other fronts, evidenced below in legitimate testing))):
BROWSER SPEED TEST COMPARISON:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html
JAVASCRIPT PROCESSING SPEED TEST:
http://nontroppo.org/timer/kestrel_tests/
(RECENTLY/HOWEVER - This category of Javascript processing speed MAY has FireFox in 1st place, currently, in THIS category (for now that is), & via their FF3 beta, IIRC!))
AND, Opera's more secure also:
SECUNIA DATA ON BROWSER SECURITY (dated 11/29/2007):
Opera 9.26 security advisories @ SECUNIA (0% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/10615/?task=advisories
FireFox 2.0.0.13 security advisories @ SECUNIA (18% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/12434/
IE 7 (latest cumulative update from MS) security advisories @ SECUNIA (35% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/12366/
----------
"but isn't going to release the capability -- wonderful." - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26, @05:23PM (#22874326) The development temn @ Opera, WAIT until something is done, & done right - unlike their competition, as is evidneced by the amount of security holes & vulnerabilities present in them (including Mozilla variants AND Ms IE) noted below:
(By the way - IF you read the above URL? The Opera team will be releasing the build this week... look for one past nightly snapshot
----------
"Safari 3.1 is a full release" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26 Yea, full alright - SAFARI IS FULL OF SECURITY HOLES:
Safari 3.1 For Windows Violates Its Own EULA, Vulnerable To Hacks
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/27/129236
(That is VERY recent also, like the past 1-2 days - FAR from "stale" news, that above)
----------
"and Firefox is a publicly available beta release" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26 That is again, FULL of holes, per the evidences above (& not as fast as Opera is on ALL possibly tested fronts, as noted in ths URL below):
----------
"In my book Opera is losing the race. The race is silly, but Opera is still losing" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26, @05:23PM (#22874326)
Based on ALL of the data above, which IS easily verified & from reputable sources? I'd have to say your book needs revision...
APK
"Yeah, Opera can do it" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26, @05:23PM (#22874326) Yes, they can & HAVE: OPERA PASSES ACID3 TEST FIRST:
.9841!)
http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2008/03/26/opera-and-the-acid3-test
AND, Opera's fsster than its competitors, OVERALL on the most OS platforms (since it is multiplatform, like FF but NOT IE (or as uch so in IE that is, since it runs on MacOS X too, but NOT Linux/*NIX (even on Javascript processing too (as well as commonly being accepted as "the world's fastest webbrowser program" in Opera, on ALL/other fronts, evidenced below in legitimate testing))):
BROWSER SPEED TEST COMPARISON:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html
JAVASCRIPT PROCESSING SPEED TEST:
http://nontroppo.org/timer/kestrel_tests/
(RECENTLY/HOWEVER - This category of Javascript processing speed MAY has FireFox in 1st place, currently, in THIS category (for now that is), & via their FF3 beta, IIRC!))
AND, Opera's more secure also:
SECUNIA DATA ON BROWSER SECURITY (dated 03/28/2008):
Opera 9.26 security advisories @ SECUNIA (0% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/10615/?task=advisories
FireFox 2.0.0.13 security advisories @ SECUNIA (18% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/12434/
IE 7 (latest cumulative update from MS) security advisories @ SECUNIA (35% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/12366/
----------
"but isn't going to release the capability -- wonderful." - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26, @05:23PM (#22874326) The development temn @ Opera, WAIT until something is done, & done right - unlike their competition, as is evidneced by the amount of security holes & vulnerabilities present in them (including Mozilla variants AND Ms IE) noted below:
(By the way - IF you read the above URL? The Opera team will be releasing the build this week... look for one past nightly snapshot
----------
"Safari 3.1 is a full release" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26 Yea, full alright - SAFARI IS FULL OF SECURITY HOLES:
Safari 3.1 For Windows Violates Its Own EULA, Vulnerable To Hacks
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/27/129236
(That is VERY recent also, like the past 1-2 days - FAR from "stale" news, that above - granted, NOW it's patched, but the point's there!)
----------
"and Firefox is a publicly available beta release" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26 That is again, FULL of holes, per the evidences above (& not as fast as Opera is on ALL possibly tested fronts, as noted in ths URL below):
----------
"In my book Opera is losing the race. The race is silly, but Opera is still losing" - by ceoyoyo (59147) on Wednesday March 26, @05:23PM (#22874326) Based on ALL of the data above, which IS easily verified & from reputable sources? I'd have to say your book needs revision...
APK