Google Updates Chrome Frame, Makes IE Better 108
superapecommando writes "Google updated Chrome Frame, a plugin that embeds the company's Chrome browser engine into rival Microsoft's Internet Explorer, to a beta version.
As it did last year, Google cast Chrome Frame today as a way for IE users to instantly boost the notoriously slow JavaScript speed of their browser and let them access sites and web applications that rely on standards that IE doesn't support, primarily HTML5."
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
On a more serious note, why embed one browser into another? Why not just install the other browser?
I can think of a few reasons. Say you're on a corporate network that only allows IE as the system is entirely managed remotely. Maybe they allow plugins for IE in the profiles or maybe they want to switch to HTML5 but the people that manage their software are too unsure of doing a full browser like Chrome that might not have the same managing options for proxies and stuff that IE allows them to control over a network. Or maybe you're a user and you find out you can install Chrome Frame and it looks like you're still using IE so everyone's okay with it.
Another big thing is look and feel. I think that Chrome Frame keeps IE's look and feel. So if my mother is slow to learn new applications and she is so used to IE's look and feel but I want her to be more secure and enjoy HTML5 pages without having to worry about which browser she's using or try to learn Chrome than Chrome Frame might be an option for her.
So We're All in Agreement Then? (Score:2, Interesting)
Apple, for example, has been aggressively promoting HTML5 as a substitute for Adobe's Flash, which Apple has banned from its iPhone and iPad.
Meanwhile, Microsoft has been trumpeting the support for HTML5 it's baking into IE9, which has no firm release date and is now at a rough developer preview stage.
Google has been promoting HTML5 just as hard. Last month, for example, Google debuted a new royalty-free video codec that will compete with the H.264 codec that Apple's backing for HTML5.
Wow, everyone is in agreement then? You'd think that they would be dumping a lot of time and money into their respective rendering engines to get a leg up on the competition [wikipedia.org] instead of just paying HTML5 lip service. What's the holdup on implementing some of these features? And if this is the next great thing for the internet why does it seem like everyone is dragging their feet? I understand you have to be security and performance minded and that there are some issues with codecs and containers but aside from that is rendering HTML5 standards really that complicated?
Re:So... (Score:3, Interesting)
BAM. You hit the nail so hard on the head it went through the 2 by 4.
We're a small to medium sized company. We push out various proxy settings for different people using IE so that we can actively log what people are browsing without pushing them through a single point of failure. Being able to update people's proxy settings via active directory groups makes it a seemless experience so no one has to run around to 200 computers and change them all.
But the bigger issue is... bumbumbumduuuummm... Web Apps! Any Custom Web App built by our company for either ourselves or our clients is 100% designed for IE. We don't have the time or resources to test other browsers for bugs or glitches, nor to deal with them as they come up. So we develop for IE. IE is that target. Now, I don't know if the Chrome Frame is going to mess with that, we generally keep browser addons to a minimum around here. But so long as it doesn't dramaticly alter the display or functionality of the code we write, I think it'd be A-OK.