[protomyth]

IE9 is a lot friendlier to a system admin trying to install on hundreds of computers. The default Chrome download doesn't even install system wide. It would help if Google has a simple MSI package that did a systemwide install and allowed for updates from a local server, not calling Google all the time.

[tuxychandru]

The automatic and frequent update system is one thing which makes Chrome very good. It can pretty much be assumed that all users connected to the internet would be atleast on the latest stable version.

[protomyth]

Actually, in a place with a good internal network and a lower speed external connection, it makes Chrome very bad. Taking up bandwidth downloading the same thing for multiple computers is bad. Windows and OS X allow one download to be propagated to multiple machines. This is an efficient model that allows reporting on which machines didn't get the update (thus making it a lot more likely all machines will be updated).

We all don't have the same internet connections that Mountain View has.

[patrickaljord]

> We all don't have the same internet connections that Mountain View has.

Luckily, Chrome use differential updates. This means each update is a tiny binary patch. If you combine them all on your network, it's still a smaller update then one single IE update of 250MB deployed to each machines.

[protomyth]

1 250mb internet download vs. 4-8mb for a couple hundred machines on the internet line is a big difference. Particularly since I can plan when the big download happens (and update) versus all the small downloads that happen in a lab at the same time because of a class starting. Students with the first class of the day don't feel terribly happy about being the designated updater of some company's software.

[patrickaljord]

> 1 250mb internet download vs. 4-8mb

Make that a few kb. And last time I checked at my work, admin updates usually happen during work hours and affects people working in the "lab". Also, it's 1 250mb that is sometimes installed on each machine on the network, so way worse than a few kb.

[protomyth]

Well, your admin is doing it wrong if updates are happening during the day. So, no people bothered, reports, and less internet usage is better.

[InclinedPlane]

I highly suspect that you are projecting the experience of other auto-updating software (such as Adobe Reader) onto Chrome. Chrome's auto-updates are incredibly efficient and very non-intrusive.

[tuxychandru]

The problem with allowing admins to manage updates is that any new version which breaks an internal app in the slightest way would be a reason to avoid updating.

This is what has given IE6 its long life in the corporate world. While this is a pragmatic decision, it can hurt badly in the long run as we all know.

[protomyth]

So, it's preferable to have a company not able to use its apps to get business done then have a non-updated browser?