Comments on: Chrome Frame: No one will care but It’s fantastic!

By: jaysmith

jaysmith — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 14:04:27 +0000

“….As long as there is good content that requires it and the install process is incredibly smooth (both things flash do well) I can see a decent install base.”

Look at these ideas:
http://cache0.techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/chromeie.jpg
http://www.fayerwayer.com/up/2009/09/google-wave-chrome-frame1.jpg

Let’s htmlize one of these and retrofit the CFInstall object which google offers.

By: vsync

vsync — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:35:06 +0000

@bub – Silverlight is on plugin I won’t install, nor 90% else in the world for example.

By: Bub

Bub — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 17:58:52 +0000

The typical user does not see a web site as a collection of technologies. They just see a web site. If the web site says they need Flash, they’ll click one button, wait 10 seconds for it to install, and go along their merry way. Chrome Frame is no different. How is requiring a plug-in to deliver a specific set of technologies on a specific web site crossing a line? Absolute nonsense.

I can’t believe people in this industry are protecting same black hole that devours countless resources (and pulled out hair) year after year with no end in sight. As previously mentioned, IE is an obstacle to progress. MS has demonstrated clearly for well over a decade that beyond a couple well-meaning developers, they have no intention of changing that fact. It’s time for our industry to move on.

By: Loic

Loic — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:22:37 +0000

Don’t forget that most computers with IE are old computers and won’t be able to run a greedy web app.

Aren’t we replacing a browser problem by a performance one ? IE is currently dumbing down web development but permit to have applications working on all machines or at least to have adaptive hmi.

By: Joeri

Joeri — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 09:40:50 +0000

Maps 3D is coming now that WebGL is in development. It’s inevitable. I’m sure that Maps 3D will use Chrome Frame as rendering mechanism on IE.

If google offers killer apps like that, which people genuinely want to use, they’ll get market share on IE in excess of 10 percent. That would be enough to legitimize chrome frame, convincing sysadmins to deploy it. At that point, you can choose to use chrome frame as a support method (either for old versions of IE, or for all versions of IE). I could see it happening, though a lot hinges on execution from google and on what microsoft’s response is going to be. Microsoft can kill chrome frame effortlessly, if they want to risk the bad PR.

By: BertrandLeRoy

BertrandLeRoy — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 04:12:21 +0000

@randomrandom: nothing, but I’m suspecting that she is a little bit more representative than you or me are. Gmail is indeed failry successful with about 150 million users, which brings it closer and closer to Hotmail (270 million) (source Wikipedia).
For Google Maps, it’s a little harder to find usage statistics, but until fairly recently, MapQuest (I know…) seemed to still attract considerably more traffic. Unfortunately I couldn’t find those stats. But being a desktop app, Earth is probably very low compared to online apps. On Wave, we’ll see with time.
Now, there’s YouTube, and yes, it’s huge (more than half of US internet connected people use it every month apparently, don’t know about the rest of the world).
So it’s not Wave, not GMail, not Maps that will help Google here, it’s probably YouTube, and the recent HTML5 prototype indicates they might make that move, especially as it’s not exactly their most lucrative property despite its quasi-monopoly. So yes, if they had to choose one property to push Frame, it should probably be YouTube. We’ll see what they do but it might be a tough sell to explain to their existing users why what already works perfectly well would suddenly require a new plug-in to get similar results…
And of course, that does not take care of enterprise users who are stuck on IE6.

By: mrfator

mrfator — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 02:15:47 +0000

As a web developer I am very excited about this. Supporting IE is expensive, hectic and degrades the user’s experience of the app I’m working on. Now if I can only convince the MS fan boy web developers on my team to see the light (I thought I’d never meet web developers who love IE so much, very contradictory).

By: randomrandom

randomrandom — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:22:02 +0000

> Regular people on the Net use:
> (…)

And YouTube!
:)

By: randomrandom

randomrandom — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:06:39 +0000

@BertrandLeRoy:
> That’s assuming my mom uses any apps from Google
> outside from google.com (…)
> The tech community is a very small part of the world population.
-
And what makes you think your mom represents the other 95% (or so) of the population?!
-
Regular people on the Net use:
> Google Maps
> Gmail
> Google Earth
-
And I bet they’ll use Google Wave too.

By: BertrandLeRoy

BertrandLeRoy — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:40:48 +0000

That’s assuming my mom uses any apps from Google outside from google.com itself, which she isn’t. The tech community is a very small part of the world population.

By: csuwldcat

csuwldcat — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 21:32:12 +0000

Hmm…I hear a whole lot of “this is not going to get adopted” BS. You guys and gals just saw Google go all Wave Nazi (much like a Seinfeld character) and say “IE…NO APP FOR YOU!” Why do you think they are not going to do it more and more in the future?

Your mom will install this, why you ask? Because Google will start making apps you use yell at you for being lame and using IE. Period. And thank god.

By: Jadet

Jadet — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:52:52 +0000

maps and mail work fine today in IE. Why would those apps suddenly require Frame?

@BertrandLeRoy: I wouldn’t call it fine. Google puts a lot of effort into Maps to make it work on IE. The thing is jumping through hoops can only gets you so far, if apps like Maps want to move forward Chrome Frame provides a solution, Wave advocates CF for a reason.

By: randomrandom

randomrandom — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:43:00 +0000

> OpenGL
I meant WebGL, of course. And, yes, I know it will only be ready in about 6-8 months.
But SVG 1.1 (plus other web SVG stuff) is available today. And Google Maps can benefit a lot from it.

By: randomrandom

randomrandom — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:36:33 +0000

@BertrandLeRoy:
> maps and mail work fine today in IE. Why would those apps
> suddenly require Frame?

Google Maps would be great with SVG and OpenGL, for one.

By: BertrandLeRoy

BertrandLeRoy — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:31:52 +0000

@randomrandom: sure, that’s success of the ideas (assuming that’s really where they originated), not of the plugin, which I think is what’s being discussed here.
@Jadet: maps and mail work fine today in IE. Why would those apps suddenly require Frame?
Anyway, time will tell, and I do sincerely hope I’m wrong on this one.

By: randomrandom

randomrandom — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:24:56 +0000

@webreflection:
Sorry for the (negative! ha!) tone in my first comment, but…:
- Your news piece (as well as Dion’s) seem to have been posted hastily.
- Yours, in particular, did little to clarify what’s going on… I think it, in fact, confused me more! :D
—
I just hope next time you guys will take a little more time to express things more clearly.
-
And, finally, let me say this: Thank you for Ajaxian! I know that you guys don’t get thanked enough… — I do appreciate your efforts and *cause* towards an Open Web. Thanks again.

By: Jadet

Jadet — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:22:30 +0000

@BertrandLeRoy: I didn’t say she’ll see it on Wave. She might see it in Gmail or Google Maps in the future, or on any other site she’ll use that implements Chrome Frame. I’m hoping she’ll see it on Youtube one day when they move to HTML5.
If she’s as skeptical as you and hasn’t installed the Flash plugin today she’ll probably never install Chrome Frame in the future. You mention Gears but this is in a different league, it’s much easier to get this out there for Google.

By: randomrandom

randomrandom — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:14:04 +0000

@BertrandLeRoy:
> I’m just super-skeptical about its chances of succeeding
> as I was about the chances of success of Gears
> (and just look where Gears is now
> despite all that Google has/could have done with it).
-
Gears ideas are mainly being added to HTML 5:
Offline Web Applications
http://www.w3.org/TR/offline-webapps/
-
That’s pretty successful to me! :)

By: webreflection

webreflection — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:13:08 +0000

@vsync the reason I have posted Robert’s comment is that everybody is saying a word but opinions are extremely different.
As example, Robert’s comment could sound reasonable but in CF ML there are already administrators stuck behind legacy applications and IE6 screaming “Hooooorray!” and “let us distribute it via stand alone installer”.
Other followers comments are really interesting as well, and while Microsoft is “playing the security card” against Chrome Frame, more concrete opinions about benefits, prons, or cons, we have online, more Microsoft will hopefully consider our positions, as web developers.
In any case, I will try to avoid redundant posts next time, and I did appreciate your honest comment.

By: BertrandLeRoy

BertrandLeRoy — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 19:59:39 +0000

@Jadet: now you have another problem, which is explaining my mom what Wave is and why she needs it.
Don’t get me wrong, I really wish this would work *and* that we could rid the world of IE6. And I also really like Alex and his work (he’s without a doubt one of the smartest persons I know). I’m just super-skeptical about its chances of succeeding, as I was about the chances of success of Gears (and just look where Gears is now despite all that Google has/could have done with it). This looks more than a little delusional to me.