The offending div has auto margins, I guess the browsers are picking half pixel values. Although chromes element inspector shows the correct computed values, its acting like right and top are half a pixel less.
I've got the same chrome with both acid2 and its reference loaded in separate tabs so I can flick between them. The nose moves up and to the right by a tiny bit when flicking from the reference to the live render. Also there is a slightly darker yellow vertical line to the left of the nose that shouldn't be there indicating that the section containing the nose is shifted to the right by about half a pixel - which would explain the nose shifting right by about the same amount.
Do the chrome forks fix the chrome 6 beta rendering bugs. It fails the acid2 test (acid2.acidtests.org). Like firefox 4 beta 6 it draws the nose half a pixel too high, but then goes on to draw it half a pixel to the right. In addition chrome 6 beta has the eyes and their part of the face flick into the page only substantially later than the rest of the face. This test is supposed to be a static test with no dynamic content.
The parent comment sounds like argumentum ad hominem to me. Can we get a true scientist around here please... And, no, the irony of my comment is not lost on me.
Posted
by
samzenpus
from the get-it-before-you-want-it dept.
adeelarshad82 writes "According to a recently released video, Google is currently testing an 'instant search' feature that changes search results as you type. The feature was first spotted over the weekend. At the moment Instant Search seems to be implemented on very few accounts. A Google spokesman could not confirm or deny the accuracy of the video saying that at any given moment Google is running 50 to 200 experiments."
Posted
by
Soulskill
from the efficiency-is-overrated dept.
Kensai7 writes "Recently, Facebook provided us with some information on their server park. They use about 30,000 servers, and not surprisingly, most of them are running PHP code to generate pages full of social info for their users. As they only say that 'the bulk' is running PHP, let's assume this to be 25,000 of the 30,000. If C++ would have been used instead of PHP, then 22,500 servers could be powered down (assuming a conservative ratio of 10 for the efficiency of C++ versus PHP code), or a reduction of 49,000 tons of CO2 per year. Of course, it is a bit unfair to isolate Facebook here. Their servers are only a tiny fraction of computers deployed world-wide that are interpreting PHP code."