
Retiring Chrome Frame - goddabuzz
http://blog.chromium.org/2013/06/retiring-chrome-frame.html
======
apalmer
Google may be continuing with the 'Don't Be Evil' motto but they sure ain't
standing by a 'Don't Be Dicks' motto. What major software company announces a
deprecation with 6 months of support. I have something going out relying on
chrome frame plugin going out next week, now I have to go with my tail between
my legs. Well lesson learned, can't rely on Google in the enterprise.

~~~
timothya
What were you paying for Chrome Frame?

Sometimes, it makes sense to retire products. And if you're not making money
on the product, then it can be expensive to keep supporting it. I think six
months is still a reasonable amount of advanced notice. No matter what, a
small minority will be unhappy.

I think the real lesson here is: don't build something serious on top of a
product you don't pay for and you don't have any guarantees on support.

~~~
apalmer
I understand this completely. But moves like this is why you see Internet
Explorer 6 still in the wild. Because C-levels can be confident that Microsoft
will continue to provide baseline support, security patches, and forever. My
boss didn't even get annoyed, he just said 'too funny' and reminded me of when
he was telling me to just build on IE7 baseline.

6 Months in the Enterprise world is a barely time enough to sneeze... Anyways
I am fine, its a lesson learned.

~~~
omh
_Microsoft will continue to provide baseline support, security patches, and
forever_

Actually they're going to stop providing IE6/7 support and patches in a little
under a year.

~~~
freehunter
IE6 was released 11 years ago, which is beyond forever for a browser version
to be supported. No other vendor that I'm aware of provides support for
browsers from that era.

------
atesti
Currently all those XP users can easily run Firefox or Chrome and are
therefore not stuck to IE7, but I really wonder how long that will be
possible. Will it be 1 or 2 years until Chrome won't run anymore on Windows
XP? (Firefox has problems with the linker of older visual studio compilers
already and any software compiled with a newer microsoft compiler will need
the msvcrt update, unless you use
[http://kobyk.wordpress.com/2007/07/20/dynamically-linking-
wi...](http://kobyk.wordpress.com/2007/07/20/dynamically-linking-with-
msvcrtdll-using-visual-c-2005/) )

Those XP machines will never be upgraded and many won't be replaced until
there are no spare parts anymore.

One really can't trust Google to keep anything around for more than 6 months

~~~
illyism
Those XP machines can download an older version of Chrome if it ever comes to
that. And if Google Chrome no longer provides support I'm sure Chromium will.
XP is 10 years old. It's remarkable that Google does still support it (unlike
Microsoft supporting their own software) so let's praise them on that.

~~~
scholia
Where do you download older versions of Chrome, please? I uninstalled Chrome
27 completely because it was unusable (slow, pale blue screens, crashy etc) on
XP but Chrome 25 worked fine....

PS XP is 12 years old.

~~~
xaro
FileHippo saves old versions
[http://www.filehippo.com/es/download_google_chrome/history/](http://www.filehippo.com/es/download_google_chrome/history/)

~~~
scholia
Many thanks! A few too many old versions, really ;-)

------
oomkiller
This is a huge deal for enterprise app developers. We've been able to develop
on a modern web platform, but have our customers use our app with IE 6, 7 and
8 (via ChromeFrame). Now we're going to have to add support for at the very
least IE8, since XP (still over 50% market share in business) isn't going
anywhere anytime soon, despite Microsoft EOLing it. Most IT admins I've dealt
with refuse to install any other browsers on their systems, but don't have a
problem with browser plugins for some reason.

~~~
guelo
Another great opportunity to pressure IT to switch to Firefox as the standard.

~~~
threeseed
There is still a ridiculous amount of enterprise web apps that are built for
IE.

Just saying "switch to Firefox" or "change products" is simply not an option.

~~~
fpgeek
So? Old, poorly-maintained systems have all sorts of issues. Not working with
newer browsers is just one of them. Consider these possibilities:

\- Maintenance and support costs are notably higher than they would be with a
newer system. It is worth noting that, technically speaking, Microsoft hasn't
stopped supporting Windows XP. They're just raising the price and requiring a
bespoke service agreement for XP support.

\- Not working with newer browsers means not working with smartphones and
tablets. A company could be passing up opportunities to improve productivity
with mobile devices.

\- It may be difficult or (practically) impossible to scale an old, brittle
system with the needs of the business, especially if the old system has issues
with newer hardware.

\- It may not interoperate well with newer systems in the organization,
foreclosing opportunities to offer valuable products and/or services.

And so on. Letting parts of your IT infrastructure bitrot has long-term
consequences and companies should realize that when they make IT decisions.

------
chadaustin
This is quite unfortunate. Chrome Frame is one of the least intrusive ways to
get WebGL support for visitors using IE8 and IE9.

~~~
slightlyoff
...and 10 = (

Luckily, those IE 9 users are less of an issue if IE 11 includes WebGL as they
tend to be auto-upgraded. The IE 8 users are a harder case.

------
jordanthoms
If Chrome Frame is necessary for you, why not continue it as a separate open
source project? Google has already helped you massively, it's not their job to
manage your backwards compatibility issues for you...

~~~
dubcanada
Because they made it nearly impossible by only releasing half the code, not
releasing any installer build, and only releasing parts of the build system.

~~~
robertshield
All of the code necessary to build a working Chrome Frame and an installer
binary is present in the open source repository. The code for the MSI isn't
there, but that's just a very thin wrapper around the Chrome Frame and Google
Update exe installers.

~~~
dpedigo
If you've got a copy of the MSI already, run it against Dark (the WiX
decompiler) and you'll be pretty much handled a copy of the MSI source.
Obviously you'll have some cleanup work, but it's a hell of a start.
[http://wix.sourceforge.net/manual-
wix2/dark.htm](http://wix.sourceforge.net/manual-wix2/dark.htm)

------
yuhong
Why not set the date to April 2014, the end of support of XP?

~~~
adrr
That would be the perfect date to sunset chrome frame.

------
scott_s
I'm surprised by the negativity - I wasn't aware that Chrome Frame existed,
but after reading about it, I would classify it as a neat hack. It's basically
a way of shimmying in an entirely different browser. That sort of thing is, to
me, clearly a stop-gap solution. I wouldn't want to support such a thing in
perpetuity either.

------
bambax
I don't understand the problem; Chrome can be installed on XP without
administrator privileges, isn't that enough for Entreprise users?

~~~
snowpalmer
Some organizations don't allow it by company policy, regardless of whether it
can be installed.

~~~
fuzzywalrus
I've still yet to wrap my mind around the Chrome frame from an IT perspective.
Even with thin clients, you could install FireFox or Chrome on your XP VM, and
it'd result in less CPU overhead. I'll admit, IT is not my specialty nor is
mega corporate politics, but I'd would venture to guess the cost of IE6-8 in
IT overhead would negate any cost of deployment of Chrome or FireFox ESR.

Anyone care to enlighten me as to why?

~~~
acdha
Chrome Frame was brilliant: users still click on the blue e, all of the
horrible enterprise loathware apps continue to work but pages which opt-in are
suddenly much better looking and faster.

Large organizations, particularly those which train non-IT workers to follow
consistent workflows like to avoid any changes. Chrome Frame was great because
it was a minimally disruptive opt-in for a better web; Chrome for Business
requires you to switch to Chrome for everything and whitelist legacy
apps/sites – that might happen if someone at the C level is really scared
about security but it's _way_ more risk and the shops in question are among
the most risk averse.

------
HelpfulBot
I'd never heard of Chrome Frame and had to look it up. Apparently it is (was)
a way to run Google's web browser inside Internet Explorer:

> Google Chrome Frame is a plug-in designed for Internet Explorer based on the
> open-source Chromium project.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_Frame](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_Frame)

------
EvanAnderson
Anybody familiar with the architecture of Chrome Frame? In terms of how
Chrome/Chromium is integrated, I'm wondering if it would be viable to maintain
a fork of the Chrome Frame code or if there are "concessions" made for Chrome
Frame in the Chrome/Chromium code that, if they go away, makes it impossible
for Chrome Frame to function.

~~~
robertshield
It would be a fair bit of work but it wouldn't be impossible. There are really
only a couple of places in the main Chrome code base that are CF-specific -
the automation interface and the external tab container.

~~~
stock_toaster
Sounds like a business opportunity for someone. Even based on this thread
there seem to be a few shops that would pay for support for it.

------
kanzure
Does this mean just Chrome Frame is vanishing, or does it include the features
that enable
[http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/](http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/)
to exist/work?

~~~
slightlyoff
Chrome Frame won't be available for consumers to install any more. Chromium
Embedded is a separate project and they can maintain whatever patches they
need to make things fly, methinks.

------
tomkarlo
This seems more like Google is retiring support for users of old Microsoft
products... considering they're offering both a newer browser, and a newer
option for running web sites that requires an old browser... you're only boxed
out if you insist on continuing to run an old IE, rather than the newer
options available from _either_ company. How often does Microsoft create
products to support other companies' legacy users?

~~~
apalmer
hahahahahahahaaa you have no idea the vast amount of windows code that is
emulation layers to ensure that other companies legacy users can continue to
use programs designed for dos, windows 98 etc.

Google doesnt have to do it, but like i said thats why the c levels insist on
microsoft even when their products arent anywhere near the most elegant,
feature rich, or performant.

~~~
tomkarlo
That's supporting their _own_ legacy products, not other companies'.

~~~
Tenhundfeld
Nah man, he's saying Microsoft goes to extreme lengths to keep old 3rd party
software running on new versions of Windows. For a long time (maybe still),
there was a principle at MS that upgrading to a new version of Windows should
never break a 3rd party app.

I can't speak to the emulation layers, but there are tons of verified stories
about MS writing special code that actually watched the running processes and
adjusted the behavior of the OS. They'd look for popular apps that utilized
bugs/quirks in older version (which were remedied in new updates) and
essentially emulated that bug for that one process to keep it working in the
new version of Windows. Crazy, crazy stuff. Sim City was a famous example.

From Joel Spolsky: "I first heard about this from one of the developers of the
hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his
application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that
happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that
is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right
away. The testers on the Windows team were going through various popular
applications, testing them to make sure they worked OK, but SimCity kept
crashing. They reported this to the Windows developers, who disassembled
SimCity, stepped through it in a debugger, found the bug, and added special
code that checked if SimCity was running, and if it did, ran the memory
allocator in a special mode in which you could still use memory after freeing
it."

I'm no fan of MS, but that example speaks to a respectable dedication to a
principle – rightly or wrongly.

~~~
tomkarlo
Yes, Microsoft maintains tons of legacy support for user's running old
software on newer platforms - but that's essentially support for _their own
legacy platforms_. They don't go out and provide tools for say, pre-OSX Mac
users to get the latest Microsoft Office. Chrome Frame is essentially software
that runs on top of Microsoft's legacy, deprecated browser and allows it to
have modern functionality.

As the post points out, Google Chrome does have features similar to what you
describe to allow backwards-compatibility with legacy sites that need an old
browser. That's not this.

------
robomartin
Sometimes HN discussions are really funny.

People are up in arms about a free product from a company with an established
track record of killing products, having nearly zero customer service and not
caring about financially hurting businesses who use their tools (no-recourse
account cancellations, etc.).

That's just too funny. What, you didn't know this could happen?

~~~
zaius
I know my parents are going to die, but I'm still going to be sad when it
happens.

------
drawkbox
They simply want people to use Chrome, makes business sense now that they have
a stronger usage. They have the option to run old IE apps within Chrome to
hopefully get more corporate feudal empires to switch. They are also giving
some time to migrate off it rather than just shutting it off.

------
X4
Something BIG is going on at Google!!

They close one product after another, to free all resources for something. But
what?

~~~
WayneDB
Google is actually the NSA.

------
stesch
As a programmer this makes my decision easier if I should invest time in
Google products like Go and Dart.

No, even if they are open source, it isn't the same if Google retreats from
the project.

------
andyl
Just terrible - most of my Enterprise users can't upgrade.

Is there an open-source alternative to Chrome Frame?

~~~
robertshield
Chrome Frame is open source.
[http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/chrome_frame...](http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome/trunk/src/chrome_frame/)

~~~
EvanAnderson
Looks like it's time for a fork.

