Perhaps it's sad that it’s easier to explain what makes a good acceptance criterion by showing what makes a bad one? Here are some horrible examples, with an explanation of why they are so awful.
On time, on budget and to required quality.
Not exactly the thinking person’s version is it? In any case, this is circular as the quality criteria is meant to derive from the acceptance criteria!
(One criterion) Meets user requirements
Well again, it's circular but do the user requirements also cover, for example, training, transition downtime, design processes, legislative requirements and so on?
Too vague – processing of what? How much faster do we need to be?
A minimum million pixel interface on an LED platform
Here’s the solution – now what’s your problem!? Not likely to reflect the entrepreneurial view of the project is it?
The project must allow us to dominate world software markets.
Well besides probably being unrealistic it’s unmeasurable and it won’t be realized until well after the project is finished, so it can’t stop “acceptance."