100% standards compliant -- have you read specs and tried to implement them before? This is the kind of phrasing I tend to expect from people that are either selling things, or not really involved in implementation. Standards aren't actually programs, and there is generally some measure of ambiguity.
Then, real-world interop issues that cause things to be less than standard. Not to mention that it's unlikely if the browser was "100% standards compliant", it would probably be missing some functionality that would severely impact behaviour.
And I'm also curious as to what benefit you think there is to delivering a browser in 2018 that targets a 16-year-old, 32-bit OS?
The advantage to being 100% standards compliant would be that when you use a specific <insert technology here> feature, it would work as the <insert technology creator here> claims that it should.
As far as why benefit to creating a browser in 2018 that targets 16 year old OSs, because there is no guarantee that we will be in a 64-bit (or greater) exclusive world by then. Without knowing the future, my goal setting off would to remain as cross-system ready as possible, which of course includes some 32-bit OSs
Then, real-world interop issues that cause things to be less than standard. Not to mention that it's unlikely if the browser was "100% standards compliant", it would probably be missing some functionality that would severely impact behaviour.
And I'm also curious as to what benefit you think there is to delivering a browser in 2018 that targets a 16-year-old, 32-bit OS?