Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Internet Explorer

Google Updates Chrome Frame, Makes IE Better 108

Posted by CmdrTaco from the can't-make-it-worse dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Updates Chrome Frame, Makes IE Better More

Google Updates Chrome Frame, Makes IE Better

Comments Filter:

  • hah (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    ie sucks.

    • hmm, mod that Troll or Insightful...
      • Haha, good call. Personally, I would have modded troll but I try not to waste mod points on AC's.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by TheRaven64 ( 641858 )
        -1 redundant. It's not insightful to say something everyone knows, and it's not really a troll to say something that everyone agrees with.

        • it's not really a troll to say something that everyone agrees with.

          (Score:1, Troll)

          I guess everyone doesn't agree with you.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by VisiX ( 765225 )

      I do agree, I'm forced to use IE6 at work. Just installed chrome frame and it works great. I had to search the net for how to enable it by default which was a pain so here's the info:

      Add this registry info to enable the gcf protocol (put gcf: in front of your URL)
      [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Google\ChromeFrame]
      "EnableGCFProtocol"=dword:00000001

      Add this registry info to optin every site on the net so that chrome frame is always used (may break old intranet garbage apps)
      [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Goog

  • ..does this mean I can browse the internet while I browse the internet?

    On a more serious note, why embed one browser into another? Why not just install the other browser? Even with installation restrictions, there are 'portable' versions of alternative browsers.

    • Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Ed Avis ( 5917 ) <ed@membled.com> on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @10:36AM (#32510192) Homepage
      Does Chrome Frame run inside IE Tab in Firefox?

      • Shakes head (Score:1, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Arg, my head hurts now.

        That said, I think you mean IE Tab 2; the original is apparently deprecated.

      • You know though, that isn't too wild of a suggestion. I hate the Chrome interface but I really like the Chrome rendering engine, something like Chrome Frame for Firefox makes sense, especially since Firefox is getting a bit behind the times lately.
      • Here's a nebulous IT project; how many virtual machines can you nest before the system slows to a crawl or fails? Hmmm... I just might take myself up on that...
        • That should so be the standard test for the virtualization capacity of different chips.

        • I'm not sure of the latest version, but I know previous versions of VirtualBox will not let you run a VM within a VM. I can't imagine why you would need to, but I'll admit that the thought of doing it is intriguing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Firehed ( 942385 )

        It probably does. I think once Chrome Frame is installed, it's basically attached to all instances of the Trident rendering engine, which would include those in IE Tab.

      • In firefox on windows, in an IE tab, running chrome tab opened to a page running SUSE TestDrive (or any other version of Linux in a web browser), which is itself running Lynx.

        Now THAT is a browsing experience.

    • Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <eldavojohn@noSpAM.gmail.com> on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @10:38AM (#32510230) Journal

      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.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Tom ( 822 )

        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.

        I'm pretty convinced your mother is not really that slow to learn new applications. What she is slow at is adapting to crappy interfaces, which are by and large the standard. We techies have learned to work our way around what is actually a horrible mess and major obstacle to getting any work done - most non-techies haven't. They actually notice just how bad the interface is.

        Case in point: Things like the iPad, which were designed with a good user-interface in mind, specifically for non-technical people as

        • Exactly. That actually works very well for dominant players like MS as it leaves people frightened of learnings curves.

        • I think you underestimate the ability for people to be confused by well designed interfaces. Watching my mom continue to flounder whenever she wants to do something with the iPhone I got her pretty much convinces me of that -- and my mom is far from the least tech savvy person around. My grandpa? Forget it.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by VisiX ( 765225 )
          I disagree. People will put up with a lot of crap to learn something "cool" like and iPad or Facebook. I can barely navigate Facebook and I've been using a computer since I could read. The apps that they think are "too hard to learn" are the apps where that is the accepted reality. If everyone said Microsoft Word/PowerPoint/Office/SharePoint/Windows was simple all the people who are confused by it would make an effort to learn it out of shame like they do with the whizbang iWhatevers.

      • 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

        Chrome Frame is "opt-in". She won't be more secure as Chrome Frame will never run, unless the site owner asks it to.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Monkeedude1212 ( 1560403 )

        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

        • Any Custom Web App built by our company for either ourselves or our clients is 100% designed for IE.

          So do you just turn down any client that A. is a Mac shop, B. is a Linux shop, or C. wants a web application that can be used by the client's customers, 47 percent of which use something other than IE?

          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.

          The same X-UA-Compatible header that tells IE 8 whether to use IE 7 or IE 8 mode also tells Chrome Frame whether to turn itself on [quirksmode.org]. Do all your testing in Google Chrome with an occasional spot-check in Firefox, and just require IE users to use Chrome Frame.

          • Don't get me wrong - if it runs on Safari, thats fine, if it runs on Opera, thats great, we just don't support it.

            We deal with a lot of oil and gas companies, the big ones you've heard of, which are not primarily Mac or Linux shops.

          • So do you just turn down any client that A. is a Mac shop, B. is a Linux shop...

            I can answer that for my company (insurance claims processing)

            A: yes, that is exactly what we do.
            B: if you don't have a windows pc that can access your linux box...yes, that is exactly what we do.

            if you'd care to start a company that caters to mac/linux users in the medical field, let me know...I know the X12 layouts as well as anyone.....and I need to lose some weight, which we will...because we aren't going to make any money.

        • Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by M. Baranczak ( 726671 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @11:13AM (#32510706)

          Any Custom Web App built by our company for either ourselves or our clients is 100% designed for IE.

          Well, there's your problem right there.

        • Erm, shouldn't you be writing to standards rather than to browsers anyhoo?

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Sleepy ( 4551 )

          Wait...

          >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.

          Are you saying that Active Directory profile updates can not support profile or setting changes to non-Microsoft applications?? I thought the whole POINT of the Registry was that all applications save their settings in this database, which Chrome does... so what is the problem?

        • So what happens when the next version of IE changes things?

          You could write to standards, you could use toolkits that hide browser incompatibilities.

      • ChromeFrame only activates for pages that request it so it can't be used as you describe. You still have all of IE's security issues to worry about.

        BTW Chrome uses Windows' proxy settings (commonly referred to as "IE proxy settings" since most apps ignore the Windows settings!) and other system settings when applicable.

        If your corporate network doesn't allow you to install Chrome but allows random ActiveX controls, something is wrong. Of course if they don't want Chrome they're unlikely to want ChromeFram

    • Software Restriction Policies (Score:5, Informative)

      by tepples ( 727027 ) <tepplesNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @10:39AM (#32510234) Homepage Journal

      Even with installation restrictions, there are 'portable' versions of alternative browsers.

      The restrictions go deeper. Have you ever run into a Unix system where all end-user-writable directories (including /home and /media) were mounted noexec for security purposes? Windows has a similar feature, called Software Restriction Policies [microsoft.com], which can deny execution of a program based on folder location (as in Linux) or based on lack of the IT department's digital signature.

      • Sounds like a good idea until lots of people start bugging ITS because they need this or that software to do their jobs. ITS now has to update whitelists for who knows how many individual employees/computers whenever there is a software upgrade or a request. Is it worth it? Depends on the business size and how much software you use I suppose.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tepples ( 727027 )

          ITS now has to update whitelists for who knows how many individual employees/computers whenever there is a software upgrade or a request.

          Why update the whitelist for individuals when you can update a whole group's whitelist? It's called Group Policy for a reason.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by robmv ( 855035 )

      Because many popular non IE browsers are very difficult to manage on a Windows network environment, not impossible but requires a lot of work and experienced windows admin (something everyone claims to be on their CV but they are not). IE has nice policies to set centrally.

      Firefox (default with no additional AD integration extension) needs .dat files added to the installation directory, you need to code javascript to do anything user related and not globally to every user on that workstation.

      Chrome is the

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by robmv ( 855035 )

        sorry for self replying, I am a Firefox/Linux user and even on Linux those browsers suffer the same problem, central management of settings. Epiphany with the use of GConf is the only one more easily managed from something like an LDAP server

      • Google installs to %AppData% because it wants to silently update the binary.

        If it was in %ProgramFiles% then the typical UAC-enabled user would be alerted to updates, and could deny them.

        Evil, or Not Evil? hmmm.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by robmv ( 855035 )

          That is the easy way to do it, but not the only one. A long time ago I implemented an updater for our apps that worked this way.

          Implement a Windows Service, no autostarted, security for that service was set to be started by anyone. The GUI application checked for updates and if it is found, it just start the service that downloaded, checked signature, updated, and stopped the service. The service was not always running, and there was no need for admin privileges to update the application

      • Chrome is the worst, it install on %LOCAL_APPDATA%, not globally, so each user need their own copy (WTF Google %APPDATA% is for data not binaries)

        Google does with Chrome the same thing that ClickOnce applications do, so, yes, it's a valid use of AppData.

        Of course, from a central management perspective, it's still inconvenient, but that's another issue.

    • as others indicated, same here. lots of us are fucked with IE6 or apps that don't render properly in anything other than IE. Example: some parts of oracle.

      the rest all runs in chrome, thankfully.

    • On a more serious note, why embed one browser into another? Why not just install the other browser?

      Because probably the majority of people that are using IE are doing so because they are afraid to install something different, and they think that the Microsoft product must be the best. They also don't really understand what a plugin is, and if prompted to install it, they will just click OK and won't know what they did.

    • I'd call this a don't be evil move.

      Some are stuck in corporate environements where they can install plugins to their browser but can't change their default browser or still need to use ie. I specifically need to use an IE browser for work and my attempts at using Firefox and Chrome (my personal choice) don't work. This is a good thing that doesn't really help Google that much, but doesn't require a lot of effort to make things better.
    • Many users have shown they are more than happy to run random ActiveX controls inside of IE, while they are simultaneously clueless about the existence of other browsers. ChromeFrame takes advantage of the first to fix the second.

    • we herd u like browsin so we put a browser in yo browser so u can browse while u browse.

      also, we herd u like macs [goo.gl] so we put one pedal in ur car.

      (ahem, i don't actually have a problem with macs, i just thought that last one is too good to pass up. well, i don't like the way apple exerts control over the entire hardware/software stack, but as long as we have options i guess i don't have a problem with them existing in general, i just won't buy one.)

  • Aww ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Stooshie ( 993666 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @10:35AM (#32510166) Journal
    This was going to be first post but I was using IE.

  • 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 asid

  • Chromium Blog URL (Score:3, Informative)

    by IYagami ( 136831 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @10:52AM (#32510432)

    http://blog.chromium.org/2010/06/google-chrome-frame-now-in-beta.html [chromium.org]

    Google Chrome Frame - Now in Beta
    Tuesday, June 08, 2010
    Web developers have been itching to develop with HTML5 but have been held back by legacy browsers. Google Chrome Frame can help break this impasse by allowing applications to target HTML5 on versions of Internet Explorer. Today, we're excited to announce that Google Chrome Frame has graduated from Developer Preview into Beta.

    Since our initial launch, we've been listening to developers: Instead of adding new bells and whistles, we've fixed more than 200 bugs to make integration with Internet Explorer seamless while improving security, stability, and performance. For example, we've improved our handling of Internet Explorer's InPrivate browsing, cache clearing, and cookie blocking. All of the enhancements and features of Google Chrome 5.0 are available in Google Chrome Frame too, including HTML5 audio and video, canvas, geolocation, workers, and databases.

    As we've worked on these improvements, we've been excited to see sites adopting Google Chrome Frame, including Meebo and all the blogs hosted by WordPress. In addition to our launch partner Google Wave, some other Google properties, including Orkut and YouTube are also relying on Google Chrome Frame to deliver HTML5 experiences to millions of users.

    For those of you who want to develop HTML5 applications and deploy them broadly, we encourage you to give Google Chrome Frame a try. Existing users will be auto-updated to the beta, so if you downloaded Google Chrome Frame before, you'll automatically get the new version. We're also creating a new dev channel release, where you can try out the cutting-edge features we're developing. For information on getting started with Google Chrome Frame, our project documentation is the place to start.

    We're always working hard to improve, so expect further enhancements and performance improvements in both the developer and beta versions in the coming weeks. You can help by giving us feedback and filing bugs, and we'll have more to share in the days ahead.

    Posted by Amit Joshi, Software Engineer, and Alex Russell, Software Engineer

    • we've been excited to see sites adopting Google Chrome Frame, including Meebo and all the blogs hosted by WordPress

      How does a site adopt a browser?

      Please tell me you don't need proprietary HTML to activate it?

      • There's a tag that IE8 uses to go into "super standards" mode. Chromeframe uses the same tag. Compliant browsers don't need to worry about said tag.

  • Yo dawg... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Galestar ( 1473827 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @10:54AM (#32510440) Homepage
    I heard you like webpages, so we put a browser in your browser so you can browse while you browse
  • You know, Google should really make a Firefox equivalent, I like Chrome's rendering engine but hate the interface. There is no ability to customize anything, I have custom CSS that I use on a few sites to block ads and to make the site look nicer, with Chrome there is no default option to do it, in Firefox there is, in IE there is, not in Chrome. Plus, no control over simple things like history, is it too much to ask that Chrome keeps cookies and such but just doesn't keep a history? I'm not paranoid about
    • You can always fork FireFox...

      Might I suggest going back to the 2.x days tho

    • I like Chrome's rendering engine but hate the interface.

      Do you like Safari better? It uses the same WebKit, and so do all these other browsers [wikipedia.org].

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Qzukk ( 229616 )

      I have custom CSS

      That'd be the responsibility of the rendering engine, so even if they made a Firefox Chrome Frame, if Chrome doesn't have a way to process a userContent.css file or whatever, it's still not going to happen. The reason that it didn't happen before is that Chrome's render sandbox does not have access to the filesystem and couldn't read in your CSS file, so the browser's main code would have to read it in and pipe it to the renderer along with the webpage.

      BTW according to the bottom of http: [google.com]

    • Remember that unlike other browsers, the whole interface in Firefox is drawn using the same engine that renders the webpage - the UI is built using XUL and Javascript. So if you took Gecko out of Firefox, you'd end up with an empty window.

      It's the reason why Firefox is so customizable - all the interface is dynamically rendered.

  • "let them access sites and Web applications that rely on standards that IE doesn't support, primarily HTML5."

    What does this mean? HTML5 is still in dev. Are there really sites or app that *rely* on it?

    The only things that browsers can support is the latest betas of this of HTML5.

    MS basing is one thing about standards but is it is another to quote standards that do not exist yet.........

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tepples ( 727027 )

      HTML5 is still in dev. Are there really sites or app that *rely* on it?

      Some web sites have "iPhone versions" specifically designed for Safari on Apple iOS. These rely on HTML5 features as implemented in Safari, and they might run in Chrome on Windows, Chrome Frame on Windows, and Chrome on Android, which also use WebKit. These features are needed especially for offline support, which is important for users of phoneless devices such as iPod Touch, the base model iPad, and Archos 5.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Rovastar ( 822365 )

        So they are apps designed for a browser platform specfic implementation of a dev version of HTML5. Hardly standards like what was implied........

        • So they are apps designed for a browser platform specfic implementation of a dev version of HTML5. Hardly standards like what was implied........

          As I tried (but apparently failed) to imply, it starts platform-specific and then becomes less so. A company first makes an "iPhone version" of a site for Safari and later expands it to a more generic "handheld HTML5 version" that also covers Chrome for Android and Firefox for Maemo. Then the HTML5 features slowly migrate from the @media handheld (smartphone) view of the site to the @media screen (PC) view of the site, and sites start recommending that IE users install Chrome Frame or upgrade to newer IE.

  • Remember the old 'Embrace and Extend'? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dreamchaser ( 49529 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @11:17AM (#32510776) Homepage Journal

    I wonder how Microsoft likes being played at its own 'Embrace and Extend' game ;)

    • More importantly -if this works with ie6 does that mean that this will extend its life further?

      if so, not good, as everyone wishes that IE6 would die.

      -I'm just sayin'

      • Even if it does work with IE6 (I don't know) it's no longer IE 6 doing the rendering. Essentially IE 6 has become a shell running Chrome.

  • So Chrome Frame delete IE and installs Firefox?
  • Does the plug-in call home with your browsing history for targeted ads?

  • It should be pointed out that Google's promotion of Javascript and its use is self-serving (if their apps don't run using Javascript then I'd imagine that they don't run at all). It also goes without even a very long discussion that promoting Javascript is potentially promoting security holes as well as excessive CPU use (and thus the browser using more electricity and being non-Green) as well as network overhead (delaying the network for everyone).

    Now, if Javascript were used intelligently, i.e. no code i

  • So I just retested the latest Chrome Frame.

    Appears to still have same bugs with HTML parsing reported by multiple users back in original chrome frame a year ago.

    These are issues that don't exist in IE or Chrome.
    Just Chrome Frame.

  • Check out this bug [google.com], which I posted over two weeks ago, with no response yet from anyone at Google.

    Don't believe me? Try it. I posted a very, very simple php file which illustrates the problem.

    Basically, when you post as text/plain, the browser is not supposed to URL-encode the input. Chrome just happily does it anyway. It seems like this would break about a million websites, so I'm kinda stumped as to what is going on, but other browsers do the correct thing.

    This isn't the only bug I've found, but it's the

  • The real question is why Microsoft doesn't implement "IE6 Frame", so all those companies that require Internet Explorer 6 compatibility can upgrade their desktop operating systems and browsers to something more modern.

    IE6 is dead! Long live IE6! Or something like that...

Slashdot Top Deals

What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey

Close