Read more.Quote:
100,000 Internet surfers will be lucky enough to test out Google's new collaborative desktop service, Google Wave, as of tomorrow
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
100,000 Internet surfers will be lucky enough to test out Google's new collaborative desktop service, Google Wave, as of tomorrow
Whilst Wave is exciting, it isn't just MS who are calling the Chrome Frame into question on security grounds - Mozilla are too:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09..._chrome_frame/Quote:
Mozilla's Mike Shaver avoids the scare tactics, arguing that Chrome Frame will not only sidestep security tools built into Internet Explorer, but also muddle the way users think about security. "As a side-effect, the user’s understanding of the web’s security model and the behaviour of their browser is seriously hindered by delegating the choice of software to the developers of individual sites they visit," he says.
"It is a problem that we have seen repeatedly with other stack-plugins like Flash, Silverlight and Java, and not one that I think we need to see replayed again under the banner of HTML5."
Mitchell Baker sees such confusion spreading even further. "If you end up at a website that makes use of the Chrome Frame, the treatment of your passwords, security settings, personalization all the other things one sets in a browser is suddenly unknown," she says. "Will sites you tag or bookmark while browsing with one rendering engine show up in the other? Because the various parts of the browser are no longer connected, actions that have one result in the browser you think you’re using won’t have the same result in the Chrome browser-within-a-browser."
Then she envisions a world where others follow the Google lead. "Imagine having the Google browser-within-a-browser for some sites, the Facebook browser-within-a-browser for Facebook Connect sites, the Apple variant for iTunes, the mobile-carrier variant for your mobile sites - all injected into a single piece of software the user thinks of as his or her 'browser,'" she continues.
"The result is a sort of browser-soup, where a given user action serves up some sort of response, but it’s not clear what the result will be... This makes the web less knowable, less understandable, and certainly less manageable."
You can argue that there are FF add-ons (like IETab) that provide "browser-within-a-browser" functionality, but that's explicitly declared by them. This "plug-in" doesn't do that, and I think that's wrong.