Anything your browser can do, mine can do better.

I am victorious.

Take that, hobos.

I don't know what that is, but apparently I suck at it.

Also, I'll never use Safari because iTunes tried to force me to download it last week.


  • failed.jpg
    114.1 KB · Views: 175
Didn't pass with Lynx either.


  • lynx-failed.jpg
    153.6 KB · Views: 184
ha - the test simply crashes my browser every time. I can't even get a result.

Granted, I'm at work, but still. I guess my system just isn't up to par...

On another note...too - many - Mccain's - staring - at - me - in - here ;)
Ahh, that would explain it. Horrible crapbrowser firefox indeed =P.

Seriously, I know a diehard Apple lover and even he won't load up Safari.
I feel it's worth noting that I read's recent article on Safari, and apparently some of Safari's devs worked somewhat closely with people from that test, or something like it- it's quite possible that in this case, Safari "passes" the test artifically just like certain old processors would be very, very much more powerful... given very controlled instructions.

Besides, Acid is just measuring a number of various web standards... that apparently aren't really affecting my browsing. Say what you will- for all the greatness of Acid, I haven't seen a situation where Safari is going to pull out ahead of Firefox on an ordinary web page.
Safari is a lot like one of those purebread designer cats. Yeah, it's probably nicer than our ordinary Internet Explorer cat, and when you shove it through a prism it turns into a rainbow instead of a pile of mottled cat organs and you can get money by letting people pay to touch it... but at the end of the day nobody is going to care because you have to drive to Delaware to get it and there's a $500 state tax for owning it and lets face it, every previous cat in its lineage was a horrible pretentious jerk who you want to forget as hard as possible.

In this analogy, Firefox is a sort of vole that survives by coming out of the ground and eating childrens fingers at night.
Well, them kids shouldn't be going near spooky places at night where kids have been, according to legend, losing fingers.

Especially not because Billy said they'd be too chicken.
Safari 3.1 fails the Acid3 test with 75/100
WebKit nightlies, however, do not.'s quite possible that in this case, Safari "passes" the test artifically...
No it isn't. The WebKit and Opera teams passed yesterday. Webkit release candidates are available for download every day, while Opera's latest version is a few days off.
Besides, Acid is just measuring a number of various web standards...
I don't understand what you're saying. The most important thing a browser can do is comply to all standards.
that apparently aren't really affecting my browsing.
Yes it very much is, you just don't realize it because it isn't usually obvious. That's what makes the Acid tests so useful - they make it obvious.
Say what you will- for all the greatness of Acid, I haven't seen a situation where Safari is going to pull out ahead of Firefox on an ordinary web page.
I'm guessing you haven't actually looked for such a situation. Firefox won't draw correctly as this proves, and it does it very slowly, which you can see if you compare it with Safari. I'm not sure how it stacks up against IE or Opera but it wouldn't surprise me if they were also quicker.

It's 2008, we're not waiting on our bandwidth anymore, why should we wait on the browser to get its ass in gear and draw the page? We don't have to.

I'm not really sure where the hostility to this is coming from. It shouldn't be a big angry problem that the latest beta version of an established web browser is more advanced than released versions, nor should anyone be getting grumpy about web standards, which are important, and exist to make everything better for you.

I used to be a big fan of Firefox several years ago, but times change, and a lot of the told advantages don't exist anymore.
I was a big Firefox fan some years ago, but it has become increasingly clunky lately -- noticably slower, resource-demanding. It seems to be the fate of all browsers (except IE, which Phoenixes back to life every generation to win back our heart.)
Yeah, I have noticed it getting to be not quite as slick, but IE used to bring down my entire computer with it- so I'm not going back there again. Opera, I can live without paying for- and Safari's features aren't up there enough to make it worth the hassle. Besides, if Safari is coming as an update from Apple products that used to leave well enough alone, I don't want to imagine what's going to come from Apple as a result of updating Safari one day.
Jooooin ussssss. It'ssss blisssssss.

I can't - I am forbidden from displaying an avatar! :(

I'll have to close my eyes and imagine a giant McCain head falling upon my keyboard, bouncing into my computer screen, (passing the Acid 3 test) then inexplicably face-planting right betwixt my tag and my post-count displays!
And offhand, if I have to look for my browser to break then I'm not having a problem; If I don't have to look, but it breaks on its own, then firefox is out of business.
It's not even about that. Primitive browsers with gigantic user bases slow down the adoption of newer standards and hold the entire web back from becoming faster and more useful. That's what I mean when I say it's not readily obvious.

Firefox is like beating rocks together to make fire. LOAF's already mentioned that it grows ever more bloated, gobbling up system resources at an incredible rate. The latest revisions have eased this a little, but it's still far more demanding than an application of that class should be. It's a web browser, not Unreal Tournament.

Let's not forget that in the old days, Firefox had numerous advantages from tabbed browsing to its plugin system that made it much more useful than the only real alternative of IE6. *It also obeyed the current web standards far more completely than IE.* That was why we liked it.

These days it shares its plugins with Safari, every browser does tabs, and every competing browser takes standards seriously now. I have no doubt that Firefox will rapidly pass Acid3, but that won't be a compelling reason to use it instead of another.

I can't repeat enough how slow it is.
I don't want to imagine what's going to come from Apple as a result of updating Safari one day.
What does this even mean?
In other words- Apple loves bundling things. Safari itself came as an update to another application, at least for a large number of users. So, while I'm happily browsing the internet, I don't want Safari to be quietly "updating" itself with, QuickTime, SimIphone, or any of a number of other things I didn't want it to.

And by the way- yeah, your points are valid. I never denied a single one of them, and I never said Firefox was the best browser in the world. I do think, however, that it's slightly ludicrous to call it a piece of crap- were it so bad as you say, I wouldn't have been able to run it on my computer nearly as well as it did before I upgraded a few months ago.

As for your question about hostility- I suppose the thread title might've biased me against the whole thing to begin with. I still hold your post that I quoted contains just as much of it as my earlier one.