Quote: Originally Posted by seekermeister
Acid 3 may not be an all encompassing test, but it is quite valid, and it was not created just for Chrome. It was around before Chrome ever twinkled an eye. The fact that a Google employee was one of the developers (Acid 2), doesn't invalidate it, and it has become a standard: Acid3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Actually, it's TOO all-encompassing. I didn't say it was created for Chrome. I didn't say the test was invalid because it was developed by a Google employee. I'm just saying that in the grand scheme of things it's a superficial
test that crams in a bunch of things at once. The scores don't mean anything for most users, and in certain ways (not all) they're almost (not totally) irrelevant in real-world conditions.
Chrome did great when Acid3 came out. Best of the bunch. Who made Acid3? A Google employee. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm not claiming Acid3 was built for Chrome. But I'm also not going to pretend the two events are 100% un
related. On the other hand, I don't care if they are totally related. Chrome did great on the Acid3 test? Big whoop. I like Chrome a lot and it ain't because of the Acid3 test.
What exactly is Acid a standard for
, anyway? The absolute maximum a browser can do? Or what the overall standards the web should adhere to, and how a vast majority of users actually use browsers?
Granted, these issues were when Acid3 came out. With these new browsers I don't know if the same criticisms apply - unless there's n 4 on the horizon and it just continues the same philosophy of 3.