Got to say I agree with the essential complain, despite the question being whether the chrome frame is intended to be used practically by sites, or whether it is to push microsoft to support canvas and speed up its javascript engine. Oh well, we will see what the future brings.

I disagree with the general idea of a browser within a browser, but it's Internet Explorer. Come on.

If you're going to have to have the user install a plugin like Chrome Frame, then you might as well just have them install the browser itself.

Chrome Frame is a solution in search of a problem. A better option would be to have a simple installation and switch methodology. For example, what about an IE "plugin" that installed Chrome, auto-imported all the settings and such (bookmarks, whatever), launched it, and went to the website in question automatically. If Chrome was already installed, it simply loads up Chrome to that website (not in a framed manner).

If web developers want to take advantage of HTML5, then they need to simply stop supporting IE. Period. Don't mess people about and try to patch IE's flaws. Just tell people "look, your browser is too old to support the super-duper features we have here, but here's an easy way to upgrade" and voila.

Kind of funny, given the popularity of IETab, which lets you render webpages using IE in a Firefox tab:

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1419

Over 25 million downloads! I find it useful at work, where intranet sites are built for IE...it lets me use Firefox as my full-time browser.

Good point Niraj. Mozilla has no problem with IE Tab, which is another 'browser in a browser" solution. Kinda hypocritical.

IE Tab just opens a IE browser window inside Mozilla GUI for those who want to use it. IE Tab is not a plugin from Mozilla developers.

I find it a little funny that this is a huge debate from Mozilla in the first place, when, like Niraj and CJ have said before, Firefox has an IETab that allows people using Firefox to access sites built with IE in mind. The whole idea is to all ALL of the web's information to be accessed by ANYBODY, particularly if they are using Firefox.

Google's solution to IE being a "sub-par" internet browser is to "beef it up" using the ideals that Google finds to be most important: javascript rendering and the like. If you've used IE for any period of time, you know that unless your computer can put ALL of its computing power behind your browser, it's slower than death by the Pendulum. Giving people who CAN'T switch from IE (i.e. people who work in an environment where their applications only work for IE) the power to use the internet as fast and efficiently as those who use Firefox or Chrome should be applauded.

Now, while it may cause confusion to people who install it without fully understanding it, they shouldn't install it in the first place if it's not needed. If people are okay with the fact that their internet is slow, or they're okay with the fact that they only use IE to access a local intranet for their business or school, then there shouldn't be any problems with the existence of the Chrome Frame. For those who are limited by IE, but want the experience of Chrome, well, then this is their way out!

So, all in all, good for you Google for helping out the little people in this world!

Looks like everyone thinks that browsers are only used on the internet.
We supply our clients with an enterprise wide web application hosted on their internal servers.
We have some (anal) clients that refuse to upgrade their IE6 installations.
This makes it very difficult for us to support all our clients with different browser standards.
We are currently looking into using Chrome Frame to standardize on webkit based browsers.

Some people are too stupid to switch browsers but will still install a plugin. This is for them.

Like Niraj and CJ have said before, Firefox has an IETab that allows people using Firefox to access sites built with IE in mind.
Position of Mozilla officials show that they start to feel very inconfortable with Chrome, they start to copy it for version 3.7 and 4 of Firefox but will stay behind.

It's not glorious! and sad for old supporters of Mozilla.....

I think Stefan brought up the point that a lot of people (including Mitchell Baker) seem to miss.

Chrome Frame is an amazing plugin for all those people who cannot install another browser on their computer. Those are normally employees of bigger cooperations. That doesn't have anything with being stupid. There is normally a good reason why IT prohibits an update of IE or the install of other browsers.

That is why I think Mitchell Baker disqualified himself by saying:
"It would be better for the web if developers who want to use the Chrome Frame snippet simply told users that their site worked better in Chrome, and instructed them on how to install it. The user would be educated about the benefits of an alternate browser”

That is completely besides the point of Google Chrome Frame.

I worked for a company that refused to develop anything past IE6...and that was this year! Furthermore, they were making the move to disallow the downloading and subsequent installations of anything BUT IE6 (no Chrome, Mozilla, etc). The best part is, they were claiming to be a technology company in their field. For situations like that (and they are NOT as rare as we would like to think), having a plug-in that works as a work around is the only way to get the content!

I also disagree with the comment that users would be confused by a plug-in. I do not find myself confused around flash, silverlight, or any other plug in, nor have I ever spoken to someone who found themselves in disarray because there something in addition to HTML. This sounds like a weak attempt to confuse this issue to me...which is, Mozilla is possibly afraid of how well Chrome will do long term. I think it is a mute point though as people develop an attachment to their browsers (odd but true).

I also think it is a bit crappy that Mozilla would speak out publicly about Chrome (whether valid or not) after all the years of Google behaving so positively towards Mozilla. Taints my view towards them just a bit.

Browser skins have been around for years. I don't recall anyone getting upset about those. Did the technology world just wake up and realize that people are actually using technology?

Link to Mozilla guy Mike Shaver's blog at
http://blogoscoped.com/forum/160539.html#id160946

i.e.
http://shaver.off.net/diary/2009/09/28/thoughts-on-chrome-frame/

With regards to IETab:

IETab for Firefox -> User gets to choose when the IETab is used.
Chrome Frame for IE -> Server gets to choose which rendering engine is used.

It is this distinction that makes many tech folks nervous, given that the rendering engine is tied to features like inPrivate mode, remembered passwords, and the likes.

With regards to corporate installations:

Chrome Frame requires Administrator level access to install. If you have admin access, you can install another browser. If not, then you can't. There may be a small number of edge cases.

the Mozilla and Microsoft reactions are only a clear signal that they have FEAR of Google Chrome...

My twocents:

First, every IE user (which is probably a Windows user) is already facing the complexity of IE in regard to security, usability, customizability, and most other aspects. I believe the Chrome plugin will not increment substantially the risks and troubles for an IE user

Second, IE lack of state-of-the-art features together with its high market share is slowing down the development of information society. Microsoft IE will probably get what it deserves in a free and open market. And sooner or later, with or without a Chrome plugin, people will learn how important is to make a browser election.

Third, at this moment there is no such thing as a web page. We have online applications and, just as in desktop applications, the developer may require a certain framework for it to be run on (JRE, .NET) or whatever (HTML5, Chrome).

I believe, Mozilla Foundation is afraid of Google Chrome. And they probably have good reasons for it. Just like IE was once afraid of Firefox.

Just get IE to fix their browser... too obvious?

It seems Google thinks computer users should be more concerned about choosing their browsers, too:

http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2009/10/google-explains-what-browser-is.html