IE 5.5 beats IE 6.0 and 7.0 on Acid 3?

Slashdot has written an interesting detail on the new Acid browser test. It seems like, according to the results compiled in this page, Internet Explorer 5.5 beats 6.0 and 7.0 on Acid3.

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) develops standards for Internet applications. For example, XHTML, HTML, CSS, etc. Acid 3 basically takes a lot of W3C's newer standards and tests to be sure that the browser supports the features it should and that it behaves as it should when using them. Acid 3 is a suite of 100 different tests to be sure that these standards are being met.

View: Test Results @ Anomalous Anomaly

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Notepad++ 4.8.2

Next Story

SideSlide 2.300b

45 Comments

View more comments

I'm not agreeing that IE 5.5 is better than 6 or 7, but I'll try and explain why the average user should care about standards. The actual developers who make the websites that you use every day are forced into put more time into developing the apps they make because of browser inconsistencies. It can quite easy double the length of time it takes to develop something if you run into one of the more obscure, or sometimes simply weird, inconsistencies that can pop up.

If we don't have standards then the whole web would fall apart, you would be restricted by what browser you use. Developers don't want to spend time creating 5 different version of their website that look identical but the code behind them is completely different, its not fun and is a waste of time.

Standards are nothing but good, they reduce the time needed to make a website and give developers more time to add and improve features, something any user should care about.

(Pong said @ #8.1)
I'm not agreeing that IE 5.5 is better than 6 or 7, but I'll try and explain why the average user should care about standards. The actual developers who make the websites that you use every day are forced into put more time into developing the apps they make because of browser inconsistencies. It can quite easy double the length of time it takes to develop something if you run into one of the more obscure, or sometimes simply weird, inconsistencies that can pop up.

If we don't have standards then the whole web would fall apart, you would be restricted by what browser you use. Developers don't want to spend time creating 5 different version of their website that look identical but the code behind them is completely different, its not fun and is a waste of time.

Standards are nothing but good, they reduce the time needed to make a website and give developers more time to add and improve features, something any user should care about.


Thanks for the response, that makes sense. Still though, the average user shouldn't care what score they get on these acid tests... just the people that develop the browsers (and the people that develop the web)

Well, considering IE 5,6 and 7 were all written before Acid3 was, I guess 1 percentage point falls well with the range of statistical probability.

The important thing is that IE8 is an improvement.
Cut Microsoft some slack guys.

How would this mean the test was flawed?

Seriously, both have abysmal performances, statistically insignificant from each other.

It shows me that Microsoft put as much thought into the latest 2008 web standards and recommendations for IE7 that they did for IE5.5 (that is, "none"). Neither browser was in-development when Acid 3 was relevant. And the Acid tests aren't a full accounting of browser compatibility or suitability. It is just one metric.

(OPaul said @ #11.1)
Exactly, this say more about how flawed the test is then the browser.

Exactly! I mean, Internet Explorer is not a broken browser, it works perf

(Azmodan said @ #1)

Exactly! I mean, Internet Explorer is not a broken browser, it works perf


Far from it. Having developed web-sites I can tell you that IE is pretty terrible when it comes to web standards and will render things very differently from other browsers. You might not care when looking up the latest news on Paris Hilton but there are plenty of people that do. It's rather sad that people choose to stick their heads in the sand and then try to defend IE when they have absolutely no idea about the issues surrounding it.

Ignorance rules!

So who is surprised about that? It is becoming natural that older MS products beat the new versions. Look at how XP beats Vista ;-))

(Jock Horror said @ #12)
So who is surprised about that? It is becoming natural that older MS products beat the new versions. Look at how XP beats Vista ;-))

Yeah and how 200 beat XP! and how 98 beat 200 AND XP! AND VISTA!!!111!

What? this article in Digg is ridiculous and was made by Mr Anonimous,Anomalous,Anomaly

Internet. Serious Business.
Web developers like to code in the old fashioned way (still)

No. They don't. If they do it, it's either because they are led into it (don't be naïve into question why) or because they suck at their job.
W3C ignores many other standards,by consequence the IE7 engine gets more complex,and breaks standard rendering parameters in the web.So being said,W3C standards isnt a product or obligatory law,it´s a technique.

Deprecation is a bitch, isn't it?
Where´s the technical data,to know how was made the test.

Open a browser, go to the website of Acid3, take note on the number.
As for the Acid3, open the source of the website.

I tried to test NSCA Mosaic and Netscape 1.0 but they both crashed in Vista. Maybe I'll install OS/2 and give IBM Webexplorer a try.

Is this going to turn out to be like video driver updates were getting to at one point (updates driven to improve 3dMark scores), instead of fixing real problems...?

I can tell you that the main reason I'm so interested in it is because Webkit almost passes already, and the test only became official a few days ago. Once Webkit passes, probably in the coming weeks/months (at its current rate), the hype will die down, just like it did when Safari 2 passed the Acid 2 test. But you'll be hearing about Acid 3 for years to come.

I think it's great that standards are getting so much recognition, personally.

Indeed. It's about time standards were taken seriously. IE has held back web development considerably and it has taken most companies, particularly online banks, years to design websites that actually work across different browsers and different operating systems.

(Xilo said @ #18)
Just take a look at which operating system dominates the top of the list. ;)

Beta or Released ? Beta means nothing to me, released does. And Safari is almost as bad as IE :S

Commenting is disabled on this article.