Well, I'm the guy who's disagreeing, but I think he misinterpreted what I was saying; or missed something I said...
Specifically that Adobe made a activeX plugin for IE 5 through 8 that let you use SVG in a OBJECT tag (where it's SUPPOSED to be) -- so that's 2001ish?
Though a lot of CSS3 is just implementing stuff that IE had back then too -- see word-wrap:break-word and webfonts, both of which work back to IE 5.x
I know Opera added support for SVG Tiny sometime around the same time as the hideous 'release party' campaign (the one featuring the bucktoothed homeless lady, surf boy slacker, mob hitman, transexual, etc -- side note, they wonder why they've always been an 'also ran'...) and was one of the first browsers to even try.
I was just surprised to see anyone using it; but I'm also wondering why browser makers are supporting something that it's champion (Adobe) dropped like a hot potato the DAY they bought Macromedia; it's fat, bloated, confusing, slow, inconsistently implemented, inefficient... oh. Ok, so it fits in with HTML/CSS frameworks, JS frameworks, and HTML 5... Gotcha.
I mean, it was a bad idea a decade and a half ago -- why is it continuing to plod on a decade after it's main contributors (M$ and Adobe) declared it dead? I mean if it didn't suck, why would we even have Canvas and CSS3? Particularly since Canvas started at Apple in Safari, which webkit is based on Konqueror's codebase... meaning any SVG support was already there. They already had SVG, and STILL felt the need to create Canvas. That should tell you a lot.
Admittedly, it's at least better than it's predecessors; VML is an outright mess, and PGML makes VML look good.
In a lot of ways it reminds me of the X-Windows API -- where if it didn't so completely suck to the point normal developers don't want to use it Motif, QT, GTK, FLTK, and a whole host of UI interface API's would never have come into being.