Essentially, this isn’t something every IE user should be using, and I think there should be more efforts on Google’s part toward leaving the healthy cells and targeting the cancer. (Er, I’m talking about the businesses stuck on the IE6 intranet.)
Although, it only works on XP and up. That automatically discounts everyone on 98.

For those companies who are stuck with IE6 intranets, but who want to get out, this could be a blessing.

I doubt Google gives a damn either way. Which is a shame.

Back to the drawing board for Google.

@Ragdoll – I’d make the same wager. Good thing I don’t have a lot of cred to worry about. ;)

@Simon – I admit some IT departments might take the plunge because of the advantage of using it for Wave while having their internal websites still run properly. I’m just not convinced that IT departments in such organizations move with any notable alacrity.

@John – Wow. That’s something I hadn’t even considered. If you’re going to hijack a browser, maybe serving something usable to those with accessibility needs would be in order. You’d think Google would care about this sort of thing, but then, I don’t know their track record on that score.

@Brad – The crutch bit actually worries me. I hate IE6 with the kind of passion usually reserved for Jets and Sharks getting into a rumble, but to casually add a meta-tag and say “Hey, this counts as support” just rubs me wrong. But somehow I would not be shocked to see that becoming a trend for the lazier among us.

I’ll state what I said again: CF helps the bleeding edge web apps that want to deploy to more people. If you don’t rely on SVG, Canvas or other HTML5-type bits of functionality – then CF is overkill.

I know that my mom wouldn’t be using Chrome if I hadn’t installed it for her and showed her how to use it.

I think that putting a bandaid on the problem isn’t actually a fix – it’s just a bandaid. Awareness is really what’s needed (and now I’m talking about IE6 as if it’s a terminal disease… wait, isn’t it?).

Less than 24 hours after Google launched Chrome Frame, the ever-fastidious Steven Faulkner wrote:

“Google have released Chrome Frame a plugin-in for Internet Explorer “…that seamlessly brings Google Chrome’s open web technologies and speedy JavaScript engine to Internet Explorer.” What it also does is seamlessly bring Google Chrome’s lack of support for assistive technologies to Internet Explorer. If a page is viewed through Google Chrome Frame in Internet Explorer no content is available to the user of assistive technology (AT).”

http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=444

My other fear is that some well-meaning but completely stoopid script-kiddy will try and find some back-door, malware type means of installing Chrome Frame on users systems “to help them”, revisiting shades of the SonyBMG rootkit ‘scandal’ of 2005:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal

I’m not saying that Google will do this or advocates this, but if you make the gun and bullets, you have *some* responsibility when the gun goes off.