Last modified: 2013-03-25 15:04:37 UTC
Google Chrome Frame plugin just came out (http://code.google.com/chrome/chromeframe/) and it offers an alternative to installing another browser by replacing Internet Explorer's engine by using Chrome's engine when a tag is added. Since we all know Internet Explorer's engine is crap compared to others, instead of getting around IE's limits, why not add a tag (or tags if needed) to make it render faster and with newer internet standards. More info is at the link. It's still an early release through.
This would be easy to toss in via an experimental extension for people to play with; just need to add a meta tag: <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="chrome=1"> I'm uncertain whether it's a good idea as such, but it's darn cute. :)
(In reply to comment #0) > an alternative to > installing another browser by replacing Internet Explorer's engine by using > Chrome's engine when a tag is added. Whats the difference between installing another browser and installing a plugin? Do you need different rights, so that people who are bound on IE6 can use Chrome? For these people the plugin itself should offer an option "always use Chrome". I mean, how many people think "Oh, IE is a bad browser - install a plugin" instead of "Oh, IE is a bad browser - install another one"?
(In reply to comment #2) > (In reply to comment #0) > > an alternative to > > installing another browser by replacing Internet Explorer's engine by using > > Chrome's engine when a tag is added. > > Whats the difference between installing another browser and installing a > plugin? Do you need different rights, so that people who are bound on IE6 can > use Chrome? For these people the plugin itself should offer an option "always > use Chrome". > > I mean, how many people think "Oh, IE is a bad browser - install a plugin" > instead of "Oh, IE is a bad browser - install another one"? Apparently the plugin is somewhat easier for IT departments to install. Also IT departments can install Chrome frame without the "This browser doesn't work with our crappy custom web apps that only work with IE6" issue or the "Our employees are so horrible with technology that the cognitive burden of using a different program to browse the web with than to use our internal systems with would cause their brains to implode" issue.
By the way, side note. If we add chrome=1 we may also want to consider adding something like IE=Edge.
(In reply to comment #3) > Also IT > departments can install Chrome frame without the "This browser doesn't work > with our crappy custom web apps that only work with IE6" issue or the "Our > employees are so horrible with technology that the cognitive burden of using a > different program to browse the web with than to use our internal systems with > would cause their brains to implode" issue. Yes, I thought of that. But I still think that either the "crappy custom web apps" should include a simple meta tag "please don't use the better engine" (chrome="0" ?) or the plugin should be configurable by the IT department as "use the better engine everywhere - but not on <domains of crappy web app>". A good and standard-compliant site should *not* need to declare a meta tag "please use the best engine available". How many (relevant big) sites use the tag?
