Rivals Mock Microsoft's 'Native HTML5' Claims 211
CWmike writes "Mozilla and Opera are mocking browser rival Microsoft's use of the term 'native HTML5' to describe Internet Explorer 9 and the in-development IE10 as an oxymoron, an attempt to hijack an open standard and a marketing ploy. On Tuesday, Microsoft's Dean Hachamovitch, the executive who runs the IE group, used the term several times during a keynote at MIX, the company's annual Web developers conference, and in an accompanying post on the IE blog. Hachamovitch claimed in his keynote that, 'The only native experience of the Web of HTML5 today is on Windows 7 with IE9.' Asa Dotzler, Mozilla's director of community development, replied mockingly in Bugzilla: 'I'm pretty sure Firefox 5 has "complete native HTML5" support. We should resolve this as fixed and be sure to let the world know we beat Microsoft to shipping *complete* native HTML5.'"
Great, now implement 3 and 4 properly. (Score:2, Informative)
Still grumbling about pages that passed the w3c validater, looked beautiful in Mozilla, Opera, and Konqueror and I had to redo them because of IE.
Re:yeah (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.basschouten.com/blog1.php/2009/11/22/direct2d-hardware-rendering-a-browser [basschouten.com]
I would say Firefox has hardware rendering, and has it for a while (that blog post I linked to is from 2009 and they were far enough to get performance stats). "Firefox doesn't have such at all" is totally incorrect...
Re:ACID-moment for HTML5! (Score:4, Informative)
The problem with that is that it's just testing specific features, and it tends to spend a lot of time (and points) on things that aren't typically relevant, but may (or may not) even make it into the final HTML 5 spec. The more important features are simply glanced over, giving them 1-2 points, while stupid things are given 20+ points that the vast majority of sites will never use. That site is nice as a checklist, but terrible at determining how well a browser is fit for today's and tomorrow's web pages.