Retiring Google Chrome Frame

[Alex Russell]

Hi everybody,

You may have seen today's Chromium blog post, but if not, I wanted to let you know that we’ll be releasing the last version of Chrome Frame in about 6 months. We wanted to give that much time to let you engineer a transition to modern browsers for your users.

The web has moved on from 2009 when we first released Chrome Frame. With the upcoming end-of-life for Windows XP and the large shift to modern browsers that we observe on the web, Chrome Frame’s necessity is fading. The future we hoped for is nearly here.

Later this year, end-users will begin to see notifications on pages that invoke Chrome Frame that encourage them to adopt a modern browser and/or uninstall GCF. These notifications can be dismissed, but will reappear occasionally to remind them that they will be running unsupported software.

For developers using CFInstall.js, the experience will change slightly as well. Once we’ve stopped shipping new versions, the GCF install flow will present users with a choice of modern browsers to install instead of installing GCF.

I understand that for many organizations managing Chrome Frame installations, this may precipitate conversations about how to proceed. We understand that the constraints of organizations that manage Chrome Frame deployments are different from consumer installations. As a result, we're doing a few things differently for MSI-installed GCF users vs. the consumer population:

• In a future release, group policy controls will be available to suppress the notifications we'll be giving end-users about running unsupported software.

• A final MSI build will be made available towards the end of the year and will be archived for some time after that. It will, however, be unsupported software from that point forward.

Lastly, if your organization must continue to use a legacy browser, we hope you'll move to Chrome + the Legacy Browser Support extension. This extension provides the ability to transition to legacy browsers for a managed subset of URLs while retaining Chrome as the primary browsing experience. We hope this eases your organization's transition to a modern web.

Thanks for adopting GCF and helping to move your organizations toward a better web. We're grateful to have been a part of that transition and, as we continue to help engineer the future of Chrome, look forward to helping improve that web for your users in the future.

Regards

[scottd...@gmail.com]

Alex - We have thousands of customers using our app through Chrome Frame so I just want to make sure I am clear on the impact.  After January 2014, will users still be able to download the Chrome Frame plugin (realizing it's unsupported) or will that option go away completely?  Also, how practical would it be to download the open source code and continue to provide (not support) a download of the plugin ourselves? 

[mathew...@gmail.com]

Thanks for the update.  Couple of questions.

1.  The final MSI you mentioned will be archived for some time.  Any ideas as to how long it will be available for download as an unsupported software?

2.  Currently the Google agreement requires all users (each enterprise in case of MSI users) to download the MSI from the GCFsite after accepting the "Google Chrome Frame Terms of Service".  Any possibility that after it becomes an unsupported software we (software vendor) could download and keep the last version of the MSI for distribution to our customer directly.  That way even if Google no longer makes the last archived version available  on the official GCF site, after a few months, we can continue to give our customers the MSI version we downloaded and kept previously (as in redistribute).  Basically we are looking for more time (probably couple of years) before we can transition  our products out of GCF and into another browser.

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:05:32 PM UTC-4, Alex Russell wrote:

[mathew...@gmail.com]

Alex,

Can you please help with the questions below and the one from Scott, about the feasibility of downloading and building the Chromium project with the intention of using the Chrome Frame part of it?  

1.  The final MSI you mentioned will be archived for some time.  Any ideas as to how long it will be available for download as an unsupported software?

2.  Currently the Google agreement requires all users (each enterprise in case of MSI users) to download the MSI from the GCFsite after accepting the "Google Chrome Frame Terms of Service".  Any possibility that after it becomes an unsupported software we (software vendor) could download and keep the last version of the MSI for distribution to our customer directly.  That way even if Google no longer makes the last archived version available  on the official GCF site, after a few months, we can continue to give our customers the MSI version we downloaded and kept previously (as in redistribute).  Basically we are looking for more time (probably couple of years) before we can transition  our products out of GCF and into another browser.

[Robert Shield]

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 1:30 PM, <mathew...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for the update.  Couple of questions.

1.  The final MSI you mentioned will be archived for some time.  Any ideas as to how long it will be available for download as an unsupported software?

We don't currently have a date set at which to stop hosting the unsupported MSI. We're still working out the details for this part, but the team's intent is that it will be available for enterprise users for a long time.

 

2.  Currently the Google agreement requires all users (each enterprise in case of MSI users) to download the MSI from the GCFsite after accepting the "Google Chrome Frame Terms of Service".  Any possibility that after it becomes an unsupported software we (software vendor) could download and keep the last version of the MSI for distribution to our customer directly.  That way even if Google no longer makes the last archived version available  on the official GCF site, after a few months, we can continue to give our customers the MSI version we downloaded and kept previously (as in redistribute).  Basically we are looking for more time (probably couple of years) before we can transition  our products out of GCF and into another browser.

Yes, this will be an option. It is possible to redistribute CF today after signing an agreement with Google, we plan to maintain this option with the unsupported version of the MSI as well.

 

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:05:32 PM UTC-4, Alex Russell wrote:

Hi everybody,

You may have seen today's Chromium blog post, but if not, I wanted to let you know that we’ll be releasing the last version of Chrome Frame in about 6 months. We wanted to give that much time to let you engineer a transition to modern browsers for your users.

The web has moved on from 2009 when we first released Chrome Frame. With the upcoming end-of-life for Windows XP and the large shift to modern browsers that we observe on the web, Chrome Frame’s necessity is fading. The future we hoped for is nearly here.

Later this year, end-users will begin to see notifications on pages that invoke Chrome Frame that encourage them to adopt a modern browser and/or uninstall GCF. These notifications can be dismissed, but will reappear occasionally to remind them that they will be running unsupported software.

For developers using CFInstall.js, the experience will change slightly as well. Once we’ve stopped shipping new versions, the GCF install flow will present users with a choice of modern browsers to install instead of installing GCF.

I understand that for many organizations managing Chrome Frame installations, this may precipitate conversations about how to proceed. We understand that the constraints of organizations that manage Chrome Frame deployments are different from consumer installations. As a result, we're doing a few things differently for MSI-installed GCF users vs. the consumer population:

• In a future release, group policy controls will be available to suppress the notifications we'll be giving end-users about running unsupported software.

• A final MSI build will be made available towards the end of the year and will be archived for some time after that. It will, however, be unsupported software from that point forward.

Lastly, if your organization must continue to use a legacy browser, we hope you'll move to Chrome + the Legacy Browser Support extension. This extension provides the ability to transition to legacy browsers for a managed subset of URLs while retaining Chrome as the primary browsing experience. We hope this eases your organization's transition to a modern web.

Thanks for adopting GCF and helping to move your organizations toward a better web. We're grateful to have been a part of that transition and, as we continue to help engineer the future of Chrome, look forward to helping improve that web for your users in the future.

Regards

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google-chrome-frame" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-ch...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-chrome-frame.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Robert Shield]

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 11:10 AM, <scottd...@gmail.com> wrote:

Alex - We have thousands of customers using our app through Chrome Frame so I just want to make sure I am clear on the impact.  After January 2014, will users still be able to download the Chrome Frame plugin (realizing it's unsupported) or will that option go away completely?  

End-users will no longer be able to download the plugin. We will continue to make the .MSI available for enterprise use for as long as feasible.

 

Also, how practical would it be to download the open source code and continue to provide (not support) a download of the plugin ourselves? 

Forking Chrome Frame will be initially very easy to do. Keeping up with future patches to the Chrome tree will require a fair amount of work as Chrome is under active development by a large developer team. There has been interest in doing this from a number of places. If it is to be done, it would make sense for interested contributors to coordinate efforts into maintaining single fork.

 

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:05:32 PM UTC-4, Alex Russell wrote:

Hi everybody,

You may have seen today's Chromium blog post, but if not, I wanted to let you know that we’ll be releasing the last version of Chrome Frame in about 6 months. We wanted to give that much time to let you engineer a transition to modern browsers for your users.

The web has moved on from 2009 when we first released Chrome Frame. With the upcoming end-of-life for Windows XP and the large shift to modern browsers that we observe on the web, Chrome Frame’s necessity is fading. The future we hoped for is nearly here.

Later this year, end-users will begin to see notifications on pages that invoke Chrome Frame that encourage them to adopt a modern browser and/or uninstall GCF. These notifications can be dismissed, but will reappear occasionally to remind them that they will be running unsupported software.

For developers using CFInstall.js, the experience will change slightly as well. Once we’ve stopped shipping new versions, the GCF install flow will present users with a choice of modern browsers to install instead of installing GCF.

I understand that for many organizations managing Chrome Frame installations, this may precipitate conversations about how to proceed. We understand that the constraints of organizations that manage Chrome Frame deployments are different from consumer installations. As a result, we're doing a few things differently for MSI-installed GCF users vs. the consumer population:

• In a future release, group policy controls will be available to suppress the notifications we'll be giving end-users about running unsupported software.

• A final MSI build will be made available towards the end of the year and will be archived for some time after that. It will, however, be unsupported software from that point forward.

Lastly, if your organization must continue to use a legacy browser, we hope you'll move to Chrome + the Legacy Browser Support extension. This extension provides the ability to transition to legacy browsers for a managed subset of URLs while retaining Chrome as the primary browsing experience. We hope this eases your organization's transition to a modern web.

Thanks for adopting GCF and helping to move your organizations toward a better web. We're grateful to have been a part of that transition and, as we continue to help engineer the future of Chrome, look forward to helping improve that web for your users in the future.

Regards

[Scott DeFusco]

Thanks so much for the response.  We are the developers of kona.com so we would need to make the .MSI available to our new users.  When you say that capability will be limite to enterprise customers, what would we have to do to qualify to offer the .MSI to our new kona.com customers?  Thanks.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[mathew...@gmail.com]

Robert,

Who do we need to contact (name/email/phone) in Google to sign the agreement to redistribute the GCF MSI?

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Scott DeFusco]

Thanks Robert.  Who do I need to contact about signing the agreement so that we can continue to distribute the CF MSI?

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:15:57 AM UTC-4, Robert Shield wrote:

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[billb...@gmail.com]

Interesting thread. 

I too have many users (not directly under the control of our company)  that are likely to be on IE8 until their computers finally die!  I think hosting the GCF plugin or MSI would be a solution for us, once retired by Google.  

Can you detail exactly what I need to do who I need to contact to arrange for this, please?  

Also I think the MSI requires admin provs?  If this is so, will there be a chance for hosting the final cut of the plugin on our servers for our users?  I understand this would be fully NOT supported etc...

[Michel Memeteau]

Hi 

Le mercredi 19 juin 2013 16:20:49 UTC+2, Robert Shield a écrit :

Forking Chrome Frame will be initially very easy to do. Keeping up with future patches to the Chrome tree will require a fair amount of work as Chrome is under active development by a large developer team. There has been interest in doing this from a number of places. If it is to be done, it would make sense for interested contributors to coordinate efforts into maintaining single fork.

Can you point me who has forked chrome Frame ? I can see the code in chromium repository but did not see any chromium_frame build around. 

[Michael Higgins]

Hi Bill,

We are in a similar situation.  We don't control the IT departments of our customers, but we need their users (who become our users) to run a modern browser.  Chrome Frame has been quite great!  But I'm not sure, sad as it is, that everyone will have moved off IE8 by January 2014.

Did you get any response to your questions?

Mike

[jlm]

Our end users have begun to receive notifications to upgrade to a modern browser and we cannot find detailed information on how to suppress this with group policy. Please provide instructions and a reference. Thanks

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:05:32 PM UTC-4, Alex Russell wrote:

[Robert Shield]

There is a group policy named SuppressChromeFrameTurndownPrompt that can be used to suppress the prompt.

It is documented here: http://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#SuppressChromeFrameTurndownPrompt

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google-chrome-frame" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[yoshimasa...@gmail.com]

Please tell me how to suppress the message without using the group policy.

Please tell me the timing of messages is displayed.

Is it possible to redistribute the Chrome Frame?

2013年8月23日金曜日 4時57分43秒 UTC+9 Robert Shield:

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Greg Thompson]

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 3:18 AM, <yoshimasa...@gmail.com> wrote:

Please tell me how to suppress the message without using the group policy.

In addition to the GP setting that Robert mentioned, the prompt is not shown for MSI installs of Chrome Frame, or for enterprises that have disabled Chrome Frame updates by way of Group Policy.

 

Please tell me the timing of messages is displayed.

Currently, the message is shown once per week.

 

Is it possible to redistribute the Chrome Frame?

Yes, under a license. I believe Ian can help you with the details.

 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[tsh...@gmail.com]

Robert - Can you direct me to the person I need to talk to to allow us to redistribute Chrome Frames?  Like most everyone else on this thread, my product is designed for large enterprises and few of my customers will have the option to move off of IE8 until late next year (optimistically).  There are just too many ERP systems that are IE8 only and even if the ERP system supports modern browsers, there is often a 2-3 year upgrade cycle and customers can't implement the latest features until the upgrade is complete.

Thanks

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:15:57 AM UTC-4, Robert Shield wrote:

[Robert Shield]

Please contact Ian Ellison-Taylor (ia...@google.com) for details regarding redistribution.

--

[michel memeteau]

Another option is to distribute Chromium_Frame the open source version of chromeFrame. although you would miss the autoUpdate and official support from google, but as google won't do any support in few months at all, it's the best path I guess.

2013/9/13 <tsh...@gmail.com>

[Dhananjay Venuri]

Hi,

I understand how important it is to retire old technologies and embrace new technologies. HOwever when i stepped out of us and went to the other countries and found that people still use XP and chrome frame technologies. I am thinking what would happen to people who are still using would the websites and apps crashes for them. Its very important to take consideration of minimum support for international users who are very slow adopters.I wanted to understand if the support termination is global or local. 

Thanks

On Thursday, June 13, 2013 2:05:32 PM UTC-4, Alex Russell wrote:

[michae...@gmail.com]

Was there ever an answer on how to continue to providing users the ability to download the GFC plug-in WITHOUT admin privileges?  We have experimented taking the MSI and hosting within our web application instead of users downloading it from the Google site and this works, but the user needs admin privileges and this is a show stopper.  I'm imagining it would be for others too and I'm hoping there is a solution... Can anyone help please?

Thanks

Mike

[michae...@gmail.com]

I haven't seen an answer to whether there is a way users can continue to download GCF and install it WITHOUT requiring admin privileges post January 2014.  My understanding is that from January Google will stop hosting the download of the GCF plugin.  We have therefore experimented in taking the MSI and hosting it within our web application instead and this works, but the users require admin privileges and this is an absolete show stopper.  The reason GFC has been a viable and good solution is because it circumvents the needs for IT to be involved.  I imagine this is a problem for others too so I'm hoping there is a solution.  Can anyone help or confirm?

Thanks

Mike

[Michel Memeteau]

Hi The best to carry on with a solution as good as chrome Frame is to go full opensource with Chromium_frame with as I understood the same level of features ( Nonadmin etc...) .

[gary...@gmail.com]

Is anyone aware of any Chrome Frame forks?  Is a starting point to that being able to build the Chromium project of which Chrome Frame is part of?

[con...@ekimia.fr]

Hi Gary: Check the mini_installer WHich is built by the chrome buildBot. Launch it with right option with command line and you will have chromium Frame Working on your IE.

So creating a chromiumFrame installer is just compiling the miniInstaller with different default option.

[chew...@bloomboard.com]

Hi,

I was able to follow the steps outlined under Automatic simplified toolchain setup with a few changes to produce a mini_installer that works with chromium frame.

http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/build-instructions-windows#TOC-Automatic-simplified-toolchain-setup

I believe the instructions were geared towards dev builds, and I was hoping that someone could help me determine if I am doing is correct for producing a release build.

5.  Modify win_toolchain\env.bat to remove the setting "component=shared_library".  mini_installer seems to not like component builds.

6.  win_toolchain\env.bat

7.  cd src

8.  gclient sync

9.  ninja -C out\Release npchrome_frame

10.  ninja -C out\Release mini_installer

11.  Install chromium frame by running "out\Release\mini_installer.exe --chrome-frame"

Any help is much appreciated.  Thanks.

-Chew

[Greg Thompson]

Hi Chew,

I'm not sure that ninja builds are at parity with devenv builds when it comes to manifests and such things. You may find it necessary to switch from ninja to msvs when making your Release mini_installer.

Cheers,

Greg

--

[chew...@bloomboard.com]

Hi Greg,

Thanks a lot for your earlier reply.  I went ahead and tried building from visual studio and am not having a lot of luck.  The build produces mini_installer.exe and mini_installer.exe installs chrome frame, but when I go to a page that uses chrome frame, I get a blank page.  I'm guessing that I am just missing a setting somewhere.

The below are the steps that I am using (having aggregated them from http://dev.chromium.org/developers/how-tos/build-instructions-windows#TOC-Setting-up-the-environment-for-Visual-Studio-2010).

Thanks a lot for your help and have a great Thanksgiving weekend.

-Chew

1. Install Visual Studio 2010 Professional, with “X64 Compilers and Tools” selected.

2. VS2010 SP1 - https://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=75568aa6-8107-475d-948a-ef22627e57a5

3. Windows 8 SDK - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/hh852363.aspx

4. June 2010 DirectX SDK - http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=6812

5. Patch C:\Program Files (x86)\Windows Kits\8.0\Include\winrt\asyncinfo.h as follows:

asyncinfo.h

@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ #pragma once #ifdef __cplusplus namespace ABI { namespace Windows { namespace Foundation { -enum class AsyncStatus { +enum /*class*/ AsyncStatus {   Started = 0,   Completed,   Canceled,

6. Unzip https://src.chromium.org/svn/trunk/tools/depot_tools.zip to c:\dev_chrome.  There should be a “c:\dev_chrome\depot_tools”.

7. In control panel, add “c:\dev_chrome\depot_tools” to the end of the PATH variable in the system section.

8. Update Run “cd c:\dev_chrome”.

9. Run “gclient”.  This installs its own copy of git and svn.

10. Run “fetch chromium --nosvn=True”.

11. Run “set GYP_DEFINES=branding=Chromium buildtype=Official”

12. Run “gclient runhooks”

13. Start VS with by running “src\bin\all.sln”

14. In VS, select “Release” configuration.

15. In VS, use “Build ->Build Solution”.

16. Confirm that “c:\dev_chrome\src\build\Release\mini_installer.exe --chrome-frame” installs chromium frame.

[Greg Thompson]

Hi Chew,

I don't see anything obviously wrong with the steps you listed. Do you see chrome.exe running (via Task Manager or Process Explorer)? Do you also get a blank page when you navigate to gcf:about:version? Does the latest Chromium build work on your machine (see http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/download-chromium)?

[chew...@bloomboard.com]

Hi Greg,

Yes, I do see 3 chrome.exe and 1 chrome_frame_helper.exe in task manager.  Also, “gcf:about:version" works for me.  I get this output:  http://i.imgur.com/Wk3JjiT.png.

I downloaded the zip from http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/download-chromium (first option), and ran chrome.exe from there (both on windows 8 and on my mac).  My website (https://apps.bloomboard.com) comes back blank in both cases as well.  So, potentially, I could be doing everything right, but that there is a bug in the chromium dev code line, right?

Previously, I was successful with Chromium 33.0.1709.0 (Developer Build 234906).  Would you be able to tell me how I can modify my steps to retrieve the code from that point in time?

Also, when I was building, I had the msvs configuration set for Release for Win32.  Is Win32 correct?

Thanks a lot,

-Chew

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Greg Thompson]

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 2:59 AM, <chew...@bloomboard.com> wrote:

Hi Greg,

Yes, I do see 3 chrome.exe and 1 chrome_frame_helper.exe in task manager.  Also, “gcf:about:version" works for me.  I get this output:  http://i.imgur.com/Wk3JjiT.png.

It appears that your build of Chrome Frame is working properly.

 

I downloaded the zip from http://www.chromium.org/getting-involved/download-chromium (first option), and ran chrome.exe from there (both on windows 8 and on my mac).  My website (https://apps.bloomboard.com) comes back blank in both cases as well.  So, potentially, I could be doing everything right, but that there is a bug in the chromium dev code line, right?

If your site doesn't render in Google Chrome, then I suspect there's an issue with your site. I just tried your site using Google Chrome 33.0.1720.0 (Official Build 237222) canary, and it's blank. If you think that your site is correct and that Chrome isn't rendering it, then please file a detailed bug report (see http://www.chromium.org/for-testers/bug-reporting-guidelines for details).

 

Previously, I was successful with Chromium 33.0.1709.0 (Developer Build 234906).  Would you be able to tell me how I can modify my steps to retrieve the code from that point in time?

You could download the Chromium snapshot just before that point (https://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/chromium-browser-snapshots/Win/234788/mini_installer.exe) and see if it works for you. If you want to check out a specific revision of the codebase, you may be able to do something like:

git svn find-rev r234906

git co (the commit found above)

gclient sync

 

Also, when I was building, I had the msvs configuration set for Release for Win32.  Is Win32 correct?

Yes.

 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[chew...@bloomboard.com]

Hi Greg,

I just wanted to say thank you for being so helpful to me.  Have a great Thanksgiving.

The older mini_installer.exe works great and thanks for showing me where I can just get the chromium release builds.  That is actually much more preferable then trying to build them myself.

My coworker posted to stackoverflow about our latest problem, which at the moment, seems to be something relating to CORS setup in our aws s3 bucket (and it could be our misconfiguration) and the latest chrome/chromium code.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20253472/cors-problems-with-amazon-s3-on-the-latest-chomium-and-google-canary

Anyway, I know this isn't a chrome frame issue anymore, but if you have any hints or references for us, we'd really appreciate the help.

Thanks once again,

-Chew

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsubscribe...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to google-ch...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-chrome-frame.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[Greg Thompson]

Glad to hear you're making progress, Chew. I'm afraid I don't know any details about AWS or CORS. Perhaps you could ask around on #blink or look at recent changes to blink relating to cross-origin resources.

Cheers

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[chris...@gmail.com]

I'm perhaps a bit confused. In the blog post it is implied that after January 2014 Google Chrome Frame will no longer be available for use by consumers as an install, so they will no longer just be able to go to a site that uses the GCF code, be prompted to install GCF, and then do so. Instead, it seems they will instead be directed to install a newer browser, like Chrome. So, any sites/apps that use the GCF install code and only worked in older versions of IE when GCF was installed will no longer work in the user's version of IE. Okay.

However, on the official GCF page it states that "the last update for Google Chrome Frame will be in January 2014." Why is there an update being pushed in 1/14 if at the very same time it is being removed, i.e. no longer hosted? Is this simply saying that there will be that last MSI version updated and made available for enterprises, but that the hosted GCF installable will be removed?

Please clarify. We use GCF at the US Courts to be able to build modern apps but still enable support for older IE because many of our customers -- regardless of how wrong this is -- continue to use older versions of IE, and many are not permitted to upgrade IE or switch browsers. So, the end of hosting the CFinstall version of GCF means many of our customers will suddenly be unable to use some very important applications. We *wish* we had control over what browser they used, or that our users always did, but that's not the reality for us. And, because of decentralization of applications and both internal and external users, we can't push an enterprise installation to browsers, either. 

Is there a viable way we can host the CFinstall version of GCF to replace Google's own hosting, if it really is ending that service in January 2014?

[Greg Thompson]

Hi Chris,

I'm happy to hear that Chrome Frame has helped you deliver modern apps to users stuck on old browsers. Yet sad to be the bearer of bad news for you.

By "retire," we mean that we will no longer produce new builds of Chrome Frame. This also means that we won't provide a download for unsupported versions. The version that is currently in beta (Chrome Frame 32) will be the last supported version. This will go out on the stable channel roughly six weeks after Chrome Frame 31 went stable, and will be supported for the full duration of that milestone (i.e., for roughly six weeks until Chrome 33 ships to stable). We may provide new installs for that whole time, but the warning text on the download page will likely change to make it clear that the version being installed will be unsupported very soon.

Please contact Ian (CC'd) about hosting Chrome Frame on your own servers.

It's very important to consider that once we stop updating Chrome Frame, users who have it installed on their computers will soon be running software with published security vulnerabilities. Also note that version 32 will have a prompt displayed at the top of every page rendered by Chrome Frame encouraging the user to uninstall it and switch to a modern browser (in version 31, the prompt can be dismissed and is re-shown once per day).

It would be great if you could encourage your users to move to a modern browser as well. Chrome runs on XP SP3 and doesn't require administrative rights to install.

Cheers,

Greg

--

[Chris Kobar]

Thanks for the response and info, Greg.

So, if I am understanding correctly, there remains one more stable version of GCF that will be pushed (32) very soon and will remain supported for only 6 weeks. So, that would mean that after that 6 week lifespan, there would be NO version of GCF that would be installable by a user via the CFinstall method as there is today. Is this correct? And that date, when it is simply no longer available for install at all, would be in January, right?

So, if we wish to continue to permit our users to use GCF for some apps, users who have not yet downloaded and installed GCF via the CFinstall method, the only option for us after January would be to host it ourself and rejigger the code to point to our version of the GCF, correct? And, to do that, we would need to meet whatever requirements you guys might have to do that, whether technical or legal or otherwise, I assume, which Ian could provide. Is this really a do-able thing, or more theoretical at this point?

Finally, if we do host our own GCF that our clients can download and install with our customized CFinstall method, would we have control over the messages that appear, permitting us to remove the warnings and redirections so as to ensure our users are not completely confused and worried when using our own hosted GCF?

Again, I *wish* we could simply have our users upgrade or use another modern browser, but the US court system is most definitely constrained in ways that make it impossible for that to be the case for all our users.

Oh, and finally, would a hypothetical user sitting in a public library on what is probably a relatively "locked-down" version of Windows be able to just download and install Chrome if prompted, even without administrative rights, or would this probably not work?

Thanks in advance for all your help. I'm just trying to help the federal government create modern apps while still being able to provide support for those users whose situations constrain them into using old IE browsers.

___________________________
Chris Kobar

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google-chrome-frame" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/google-chrome-frame/WAY4hExKqbE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[Tim Shippy]

Thanks for the clarification about the end of support for Chrome Frames.  I do want to confirm that the administrative template will still provide the ability to "Suppress the Google Chrome Frame turndown prompt"?  

As much as I understand you guys wanting customers to adopt modern browsers, the migration is slow.  Our customers want to move, but they have enterprise software that only runs in IE8.  Consider a common enterprise software scenario.  3 years ago a CIO signed a check to upgrade his ERP system.  There was a 12 month backlog to begin implementation, followed by a 16 week design process after which time they place orders for new hardware... 18 months into the process, they begin a 12 month rollout to over 50,000 users.  Overall it is not uncommon for this type of implementation to be a 2-3 year process.  After the ERP system is complete they can start migrating users off of secondary systems that integrate with the ERP system...

The whole process is slow, and no amount of warning messages or pressure will speed it up.  I am sure I am not alone saying I took a substantial risk in choosing Chrome Frames over native support for IE8.  I can live with an end to ongoing support for Chrome Frames, but PLEASE do not make the experience suck for users and equally important system administrators who are stuck with it now.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Google-chrome-frame" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/google-chrome-frame/WAY4hExKqbE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[Ian Ellison-Taylor]

Chris, I'll contact you over email in a bit to talk about the licensing options for you own version but in short it's definitely do-able, it's just a LOT of work.

In the library scenario, I would imagine that machines that can install arbitrary extensions ala GCF could just as easily install the non-admin version of Chrome. It's hard to generalize though.

[schnm...@gmail.com]

Hello Greg,

First of all thanks for sharing this valuable inputs about GCF, would be great if you help me understand GCF unsupported disclaimer what I understood is after Jan2014 we would be using ChromeFrame installed in our users system as it works today and Google will not provide any new versions of it and will not provide any support if we face any issue?

It would be really helpful if you can please elaborate your below statement:

"It's very important to consider that once we stop updating Chrome Frame, users who have it installed on their computers will soon be running software with published security vulnerabilities"

Thanks in advance and have a nice day!

Thanks,

Sachin M

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[William Edney]

All -

So I've been debating about weighing in here regarding end-of-life for Chrome Frame, but as someone who has been relying on Chrome Frame (or at least the ability to say "but it will run on Chrome Frame" to clients), I feel I should at least throw my 2 cents in.

First of all, I must thank Alex Russell and the entire Chrome Frame team at Google for this wonderful piece of software that has been a significant force in pulling the Web forward. Truly a game changer.

Back in June when this announcement was made, I was sort of shocked. My initial gut reaction was "it's way too soon - like 2 years too soon".

Then, I thought to myself, "Google is a very data driven company. Surely they'll share the statistics that brought them to this decision". (As an aside, if this decision was data-driven, I haven't seen the data. Maybe I am remiss in this and it exists somewhere in a blog post or web page. Please correct me if I'm wrong).

But then I realized that it doesn't matter, for Chrome Frame's *real* customers are not Google's customers. Google is a *consumer* web company - not an *enterprise* web company. What Chrome Frame was originally designed for is *not* what most of the people on this list are using it for. They're using it for internal, enterprise web applications where OS and browser upgrades are measured in terms of **years** not *weeks*.

Google can't really measure Chrome Frame's impact, because where Chrome Frame is really being used heavily is all behind an organization's firewall - a "modern HTML5 web app" running from IE8 (or sometimes even IE7) to that organization's web server hosting an internal, back office application. Can't collect statistics from there.

So all of us who have been using Chrome Frame in this fashion (i.e. easy "selling" of HTML5 to management in organizations still running 5 year old browsers & OSes) have really been 'riding the coattails' of Google's effort here, and for that we must thank Google heartily!!

I only really have one suggestion here in how to move forward:

Has there been any attempt or is there any interest at Google in trying to get a more "enterprisey" Web company (i.e. IBM, Oracle, Salesforce - anyone with some 'enterprise Web' game) in taking over GCF support and maintenance?

Does anyone on this list work for any of those companies and think they might be able to generate some interest in taking over GCF?

Is this even something worth doing?

That's all I have - thanks again to the Google team!

Respectfully Yours,

- Bill Edney

- Technical Pursuit Inc.

[Greg Thompson]

On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:18 AM, <schnm...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Greg,

First of all thanks for sharing this valuable inputs about GCF, would be great if you help me understand GCF unsupported disclaimer what I understood is after Jan2014 we would be using ChromeFrame installed in our users system as it works today and Google will not provide any new versions of it and will not provide any support if we face any issue?

Right, Google will not produce any new builds or provide any support.

 

It would be really helpful if you can please elaborate your below statement:

"It's very important to consider that once we stop updating Chrome Frame, users who have it installed on their computers will soon be running software with published security vulnerabilities"

Each release of Chrome Frame includes various security fixes (see the Chrome Releases blog). Once Google stops updating Chrome Frame on users' machines, those users will be running outdated software with known security vulnerabilities. The best course of action for the sake of users is for all sites that currently either prompt users to install Chrome Frame or opt-in to rendering via Chrome Frame to instruct users to uninstall Chrome Frame and switch to a modern browser.

 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[Greg Thompson]

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Chris Kobar <chris...@mac.com> wrote:

Thanks for the response and info, Greg.

So, if I am understanding correctly, there remains one more stable version of GCF that will be pushed (32) very soon and will remain supported for only 6 weeks. So, that would mean that after that 6 week lifespan, there would be NO version of GCF that would be installable by a user via the CFinstall method as there is today. Is this correct?

Correct.

 

And that date, when it is simply no longer available for install at all, would be in January, right?

I can't give you an exact date, but you can extrapolate 12 weeks out from the date that Chrome Frame 31 hit the stable channel (http://googlechromereleases.blogspot.ca/2013/11/stable-channel-update.html) to get a rough idea.

 

So, if we wish to continue to permit our users to use GCF for some apps, users who have not yet downloaded and installed GCF via the CFinstall method, the only option for us after January would be to host it ourself and rejigger the code to point to our version of the GCF, correct? And, to do that, we would need to meet whatever requirements you guys might have to do that, whether technical or legal or otherwise, I assume, which Ian could provide. Is this really a do-able thing, or more theoretical at this point?

Finally, if we do host our own GCF that our clients can download and install with our customized CFinstall method, would we have control over the messages that appear, permitting us to remove the warnings and redirections so as to ensure our users are not completely confused and worried when using our own hosted GCF?

You can present the download with your own messaging, but the in-product prompt advising users to uninstall it will be there. The prompt can be disabled via Group Policy (http://www.chromium.org/administrators/policy-list-3#SuppressChromeFrameTurndownPrompt), but this is something for administrators to do.

 

Again, I *wish* we could simply have our users upgrade or use another modern browser, but the US court system is most definitely constrained in ways that make it impossible for that to be the case for all our users.

Oh, and finally, would a hypothetical user sitting in a public library on what is probably a relatively "locked-down" version of Windows be able to just download and install Chrome if prompted, even without administrative rights, or would this probably not work?

Chrome can be installed without admin rights. Whether or not other restrictions on a library computer would prevent its installation is up to the administrators of those computers.

 

Thanks in advance for all your help. I'm just trying to help the federal government create modern apps while still being able to provide support for those users whose situations constrain them into using old IE browsers.

An interested party could fork the source code and maintain a custom (non-Google branded) build. It would be a non-trivial amount of work to do, but perhaps a dedicated group of developers could get such a project going.

Cheers,

Greg

[Greg Thompson]

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Tim Shippy <tsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for the clarification about the end of support for Chrome Frames.  I do want to confirm that the administrative template will still provide the ability to "Suppress the Google Chrome Frame turndown prompt"?

Yes, this control will remain in place.

 

As much as I understand you guys wanting customers to adopt modern browsers, the migration is slow.  Our customers want to move, but they have enterprise software that only runs in IE8.  Consider a common enterprise software scenario.  3 years ago a CIO signed a check to upgrade his ERP system.  There was a 12 month backlog to begin implementation, followed by a 16 week design process after which time they place orders for new hardware... 18 months into the process, they begin a 12 month rollout to over 50,000 users.  Overall it is not uncommon for this type of implementation to be a 2-3 year process.  After the ERP system is complete they can start migrating users off of secondary systems that integrate with the ERP system...

The whole process is slow, and no amount of warning messages or pressure will speed it up.  I am sure I am not alone saying I took a substantial risk in choosing Chrome Frames over native support for IE8.  I can live with an end to ongoing support for Chrome Frames, but PLEASE do not make the experience suck for users and equally important system administrators who are stuck with it now.

Thanks for sharing your experience with us. We're trying to keep users' best interests in mind.

Regards,

[Greg Thompson]

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 11:24 PM, William Edney <bed...@technicalpursuit.com> wrote:

All -

So I've been debating about weighing in here regarding end-of-life for Chrome Frame, but as someone who has been relying on Chrome Frame (or at least the ability to say "but it will run on Chrome Frame" to clients), I feel I should at least throw my 2 cents in.

First of all, I must thank Alex Russell and the entire Chrome Frame team at Google for this wonderful piece of software that has been a significant force in pulling the Web forward. Truly a game changer.

Back in June when this announcement was made, I was sort of shocked. My initial gut reaction was "it's way too soon - like 2 years too soon".

Then, I thought to myself, "Google is a very data driven company. Surely they'll share the statistics that brought them to this decision". (As an aside, if this decision was data-driven, I haven't seen the data. Maybe I am remiss in this and it exists somewhere in a blog post or web page. Please correct me if I'm wrong).

But then I realized that it doesn't matter, for Chrome Frame's *real* customers are not Google's customers. Google is a *consumer* web company - not an *enterprise* web company. What Chrome Frame was originally designed for is *not* what most of the people on this list are using it for. They're using it for internal, enterprise web applications where OS and browser upgrades are measured in terms of **years** not *weeks*.

Google can't really measure Chrome Frame's impact, because where Chrome Frame is really being used heavily is all behind an organization's firewall - a "modern HTML5 web app" running from IE8 (or sometimes even IE7) to that organization's web server hosting an internal, back office application. Can't collect statistics from there.

So all of us who have been using Chrome Frame in this fashion (i.e. easy "selling" of HTML5 to management in organizations still running 5 year old browsers & OSes) have really been 'riding the coattails' of Google's effort here, and for that we must thank Google heartily!!

I only really have one suggestion here in how to move forward:

Has there been any attempt or is there any interest at Google in trying to get a more "enterprisey" Web company (i.e. IBM, Oracle, Salesforce - anyone with some 'enterprise Web' game) in taking over GCF support and maintenance?

A third-party could fork the open source code and maintain a non-Google branded build. There would be challenges, such as getting an automatic update system in place, but it is possible. Those of us who've worked on Chrome Frame would be excited to see it live on.

[chew...@bloomboard.com]

Hi Greg,

I have a question about how chrome frame auto-update will work after the chrome frame sunset for users that already have chrome frame installed and auto-update is not disabled.

1) Do you know the user experience that those users will see?  Silent error? Pop-up error indicated that chrome frame is retired? Will chrome frame just update anyway to latest chrome binaries, leaving chrome frame potentially broken?

2) What happens if they have chrome also installed?

3) Is there variance to the above question if chrome frame was installed without admin rights, and chrome was installed with admin rights?

Thanks a lot,

-Chew

[chew...@bloomboard.com]

Hi,

Just wanted to follow up on the below, so I can set expectations with our customers.

[Greg Thompson]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:34 AM, <chew...@bloomboard.com> wrote:

Hi Greg,

Hi Chew. Apologies for the delay in my response. See below.

 

I have a question about how chrome frame auto-update will work after the chrome frame sunset for users that already have chrome frame installed and auto-update is not disabled.

1) Do you know the user experience that those users will see?  Silent error? Pop-up error indicated that chrome frame is retired? Will chrome frame just update anyway to latest chrome binaries, leaving chrome frame potentially broken?

Chrome Frame will stop updating when support ends. Users will see an always-on infobar at the top of pages rendered in Chrome Frame advising them to uninstall it (this is the current experience on the beta channel). It is in users' best interests to uninstall at this point, since they will otherwise be using an insecure plugin when support ends.

2) What happens if they have chrome also installed?

Installations of Chrome will be unaffected; they will update as usual.

3) Is there variance to the above question if chrome frame was installed without admin rights, and chrome was installed with admin rights?

Nope.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-f...@googlegroups.com.

[ch...@allestelle.com]

Hi Greg,

If I remember well, there were at least 2 different ways how Chrome frame is installed on the browser. 

The page http://www.google.com/chromeframe can have different GET parameters. For example: prefersystemlevel=true

Can you elaborate a little bit on the logic behind these parameters and the logic on http://www.google.com/chromeframe in general?
What change according different browsers or configurations of Window?

Are there different version of the installer? In what do they differ?

Best,

    Chris

[Greg Thompson]

With the exception of ?msi=true, the combinations of GET parameters result in different command line options being used on the same download. Given a mini_installer.exe (from a custom build or from the Chromium snapshots), the two ways of installing Chrome Frame are:

• per-machine (as an Administrator or as SYSTEM): mini_installer.exe --chrome-frame --verbose-logging --system-level
• per-user (as a regular user account): mini_installer.exe --chrome-frame --verbose-logging

The log file will be placed in %TEMP%\chrome_frame_installer.log and may be useful to diagnose install errors.

Regards,

Greg

Best,

    Chris

[guyp...@gmail.com]

Has anyone ever figured out a way to do that? or forked chrome frame and did it on their own?

On Wednesday, December 18, 2013 at 2:38:49 PM UTC, Greg Thompson wrote:

On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:09 PM, <ch...@allestelle.com> wrote:

Hi Greg,

If I remember well, there were at least 2 different ways how Chrome frame is installed on the browser. 

The page http://www.google.com/chromeframe can have different GET parameters. For example: prefersystemlevel=true

Can you elaborate a little bit on the logic behind these parameters and the logic on http://www.google.com/chromeframe in general?
What change according different browsers or configurations of Window?

Are there different version of the installer? In what do they differ?

With the exception of ?msi=true, the combinations of GET parameters result in different command line options being used on the same download. Given a mini_installer.exe (from a custom build or from the Chromium snapshots), the two ways of installing Chrome Frame are:

• per-machine (as an Administrator or as SYSTEM): mini_installer.exe --chrome-frame --verbose-logging --system-level
• per-user (as a regular user account): mini_installer.exe --chrome-frame --verbose-logging

The log file will be placed in %TEMP%\chrome_frame_installer.log and may be useful to diagnose install errors.

Regards,

Greg

Best,

    Chris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google-chrome-frame" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-chrome-frame+unsub...@googlegroups.com.