Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Slams Chrome Frame As "Browser Soup"
CWmike writes "Mozilla executives today took shots at Google for pitching its Chrome Frame plug-in as a solution to Internet Explorer's poor performance, with one arguing that Google's move will result in 'browser soup.' The Mozilla reaction puts the company that builds Firefox on the same side of the debate as rival Microsoft, which has also blasted Google over the plug-in. Mitchell Baker, the former CEO of Mozilla and currently the chairman of the Mozilla Foundation, said in a blog post, 'The overall effects of Chrome Frame are undesirable. I predict positive results will not be enduring and — and to the extent it is adopted — Chrome Frame will end in growing fragmentation and loss of control for most of us, including Web developers.' Baker says Chrome Frame's browser-in-a-browser will confuse users and render some of their familiar tools useless. 'Once your browser has fragmented into multiple rendering engines, it's very hard to manage information across Web sites. Some information will be manageable from the browser you use and some information from Chrome Frame. This defeats one of the most important ways in which a browser can help people manage their [Web] experience.'"
Baker says Chrome Frame's browser-in-a-browser will confuse users and render some of their familiar tools useless. Some information will be manageable from the browser you use and some information from Chrome Frame.
Interestingly, isn't this an exactly same issue with Firefox addons too? Some of them might create the same kind of incompabilities than Chrome Frame plugin does.
On that note, in my opinion Chrome Frame itself serve's little to none purpose. If you can install it, you could install the actual Chrome (or some other) browser aswell. Websites need to opt-in for using the Chrome Frame for rendering with a metatag, and I think Google will be lucky if even 1% add that tag.
Only good reason I've come across is the next note from the article
Specifically, said Google, it was pushing Chrome Frame because it decided it wasn't worth trying to make its new collaboration and communications tool, Google Wave, work with IE. Google developers spent "countless hours" on tweaking Wave for IE, but gave up.
Which does make sense. Users can use IE, but still get the Wave to work. But I except google to take more major approach about the plugin soon.
A very important point. Those of us who build the web finally thought we were seeing some movement with the increasing adoption of Firefox (mainly) causing Microsoft to build better browsers in IE7, and more so, IE8. We really looked forward to moving from a development model where 50% of the time was spent building the site to standards, and 50% hacking for Internet Explorer.
The Mothership
None of the engines in a browser (rendering, scripting, etc) should be relevant. They should all follow web standards. Sure it might break crap-tastic websites that use browser sniffing to try & server browser-specific content. But we already have that in javascript by detecting capabilities instead of using browser sniffing. By allowing this, it allows websitesï to force IE to behave like a standards compliant browser which will hopefully, in the long run, get rid of all the major IE vs. world hacks (and hopefully many of the inter-browser incompatibility checks).
Oh boy. Here we go.
Mozilla drags IE into the future with Canvas element plugin
Granted, Mozilla's technology doesn't do as much as Chrome Frame. It does less. But it introduced tag soup into IE. One can now, according to Mozilla's own damn hypocritic opinion because of a technological big brother envy, be sure of how IE render content.
"Once your browser has fragmented into multiple rendering engines, it's very hard to manage information across Web sites" - Mozilla
Oh, and how does adding canvas support reduce confusion when even more complete HTML 5 support won't?
But read on guys... It get funnier.
Ars Technica:
This Canvas plugin is only the first step toward bringing standards-based web technologies to Internet Explorer. Mozilla is working on a much more ambitious initiative called Screaming Monkey that will make it possible to plug Mozilla's entire next-generation JavaScript engine directly into Microsoft's web browser. If these plugins gain widespread acceptance, it will empower web developers and give them the ability to target web standards and not have to compensate as much for Internet Explorer's broken behavior.
Hahaha! I love this! Thanks for the laugh, Mozilla!
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
It is about time I started seeing technology of this nature, but we are still not there yet. I would love to see this framework system support plugins that way when I design a site I specify what rendering engine is needed, and the browser simply loads it and renders my page 100% correct 100% of the time. It would also make it easer for the W3C to push standards as they could release their own rendering engine as soon as they are published and everyone could start using them so long as the browser supports framework plugins. There is also an added benefit that more time could be spent on the main functions of the browser and other stuff rather than messing with rendering. Anyways, If I don't see anything in the next few years I am going to have to put together a division and scratch that itch.
Well, if your asking for a vote, I'd vote to give W3C some teeth. Seems to me it should be, 1) User of the browser. 2) W3C. 3) Browser. 4) Web site author.
I agree 100%. There are a lot of people on here crying about how "IE SUCKS! We shouldn't fix it, we should force people to use a real browser!" etc... You know what? If the reason IE sucks is strictly because of its crappy JS engine and standards incompatibilities, and Google has now effectively fixed that, then what's wrong with people using IE?
Don't get me wrong... I love open source. I love Firefox. I use both almost exclusively for work and for play. I know that Firefox is strictly superior in numerous ways to IE. That said, my company is heavily web-centric, and if Firefox has to lose some market share, even die out completely (which it won't... it's open source), in order for everybody to have a standards compliant browser, I say FINE. Besides the fact that we spend about 1/4 of our time coding specifically to IE, my next biggest opposition to IE is the fact that MS has it on lock-down... well, with this plugin MS has to share its control over IE with Google... if MS cuts out Google and this plugin doesn't work anymore, then guess what? IE doesn't work on any websites anymore, either. FAIL. Not to say that Google is perfect either, but I think an evil conspiracy between the two down the road is an unlikely scenario.
A web browser is ultimately just a means to an end. There are trillions of dollars tied up in companies who develop content for the web, and just a few companies who develop significant browsers for it. How many billions of dollars could be saved every year if we simply didn't have to worry about how badly IE sucks ass?
For the retards out there who still don't understand why this is the only logical position for anybody who isn't a browser developer, here's an exaggerated car analogy. Say Microsoft started making shitty cars, and Mozilla started making a better open source car... And then Google created a magical perpetual motion machine for Microsoft's cars which eliminated the need for any fuel and produced food for starving children as its only byproduct. Would we all be up in arms about "OH NOES everybody's gonna start using the M$ shit car!!!1111"? What is up with your priorities, Slashdot???