Today, Paul Thurott launched into a completely misguided tirade over IE7's support of the Acid2 "standards compliance" test. Go read it. I'll wait paitently here.
Back yet? Good. Let's move on.
Paul's so hell bent on raising a stink about the whole thing that he missed what the Web Standards Project... you know, the people that created the test in the first place, said to News.com:
"While it doesn't hit everything we might like, and we won't see most of it until Beta 2, it's a pretty impressive list for a release that by all accounts is primarily about security and UI features," Web Standards Project member Chris Kaminski wrote. "Even more impressive than the contents of the list, though, is that it's even available outside the Redmond campus. Having been through this 'work with Microsoft' thing once before in the late '90s, I can assure you this sort of openness is a radical departure from the Microsoft of old and as good a reason as any for optimism that this is just the beginning, and we can expect even more and better in IE 7.5 and beyond."
But their quote from a previous post is even better (emphasis theirs):
Expecting full bug fixes and implementation in any beta software is ridiculous, as is expecting that WaSP / Microsoft Task Force can perform retroactive miracles. IE7 is in beta;. Not only that, but it's early days yet. So it's a little bit premature to start complaining that things don't work.
The WaSP likes it. They even sound excited about it. So what the hell is Paul's problem?
Paul's not a developer. I'd put 20 bucks on a bet that Paul's never written a single line of code in his life. I, on the other hand, have dealt with making a site run in IE. If I've spent a bunch of time writing code, and I've invested money as a company into making that happen, I don't want Microsoft to come along and break it with wanton disregard for my time and money. If it works in IE6, it should work on IE7. But at the end of the day, Paul needs something to complain about, because his opinion is getting more and more irrelevant, and he knows it.
Looking pack at his post, he has this rosy outlook on the situation:
Furthermore, by halting all IE development for several years before reconstituting the IE team to create IE 7.0, Microsoft has set back Web development by an immeasurable amount of time.
It couldn't have been that bad, since other browsers claim that they support the test, without Microsoft's help. But Paul apparently thinks that HTML with CSS is the end-all-be-all of web development. What he doesn't get is that there are other technologies, some not even explained on paper yet, that will far surpass the invention of HTML. Someday, HTML will be a fond and distant memory, much like my Nintendo from my youth.
So how does Paul wrap up this blathering tirade of shortsightedness? With a penchant for the dramatic, he has this to say:
My advice is simple: Boycott IE. It's a cancer on the Web that must be stopped. IE isn't secure and isn't standards-compliant, which makes it unworkable both for end users and Web content creators. Because of their user bases, however, Web developers are hamstrung into developing for IE at the expense of established standards that work well in all other browsers. You can turn the tide by demanding more from Microsoft and by using a better alternative Web browser. I recommend and use Mozilla Firefox, but Apple Safari (Macintosh only) and Opera 8 are both worth considering as well.
Paul has a dream, and he doesn't want web users sitting at the back of Microsoft's bus. Cause, you know, average users give a damn about the petty bickering of geeks over whose ideas everyone can agree on.
So what about the "support" from those other browsers? That article on News.com had this wonderful tidbit of hyporitical goodness:
[Hakon Lie of Opera Software] said Opera was "very close" to passing Acid2. Apple Computer has already said that its Safari browser passes the test in preliminary builds. The Mozilla Foundation said it was committed to "full support" of Acid2 in its Firefox browser but did not say when it expected to pass the test.
So all those Firefox zealots cheer how secure and wonderful it is... but it doesn't actually pass the test at all, and they have no idea when it will, but they "support the idea and it will pass... someday". I may have drank the Kool-Aid, but whatever they're on, I WANT IT!
Maybe Paul and his lot should take the Acid Trip straight to Congress and run under the Democratic ticket. Those guys like to support a lot of things without committing to a plan of action too!
But then again, he is entitled to his own opinion.