Turns out Google's making good on their deal to make Chrome(-e ium) a metro-compatible program for Windows 8, and have thrown us a bone in the form of a screenshot.

http://blog.chromium.org/2012/06/try-chrome-in-metro-mode.html

Too lazy to use the image uploader, so just click this.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yz2f2jkYczc/T9DdFpE0ufI/AAAAAAAAAx8/_EeWNH1YXYE/s1600/chrome_in_metro.png

From reading the article it should be out Tuesday afternoon, maybe earlier if it pops up in http://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/chromium-browser-continuous/index.html.

OH NOES! You didn't use the image uploader, now the moderators are going to punish us! Oh terrible things! Oh dark nights and dreary days!

You can post links.

That's a very poor attempt at Metro. Can't see it being particularly touch-friendly either.

Also, in true Google style, they managed to repeat the lie that MS is "blocking other browsers" throughout the article.

Huh. How is slapping a owner drawn window frame on an existing desktop application Metro? Try harder.

At this point, this is more prototype work.

It looks more like Chrome OS, but if it has got integration with charms so is OK at least for me.

It looks almost like the same thing chrome is now, except bulkier.

It's interesting that it is mentioned only once in this article for the purpose of stating it will not work on ARM yet you side so strongly with Microsoft's decision on being the only developer that can run native metro apps on ARM. Competition to get the best performance is a good thing... just look what happened to performance last time IE faced fierce competition; it adopted standards and greatly increased speed in order to stay competitive.

Anyone can develop native metro apps for ARM. It's Win32 apps that Microsoft restrict on ARM, mainly because they want to encourage Metro to be used on the ARM tablets, rather than people just porting touch-unfriendly Win32 apps. Google (and Mozilla) are simply upset because this means they'll have to put effort into porting it, rather than just changing some build scripts, and claim its unfair that Microsoft themselves don't have to abide by this "restriction" (even though there's nothing preventing anyone doing a full browser in the Metro environment).

Once again, Google's deliberate spreading of misinformation has got someone confused.

Just because an app uses Win32 code doesn't mean it also has to use its window manager, not to mention the fact that, afaik, Metro apps are sandboxed as a security reason, which feels too drastic as a measure for me.
I mean, ok, I understand this reduces the chance for misbehaving apps to affect the system, or for malware to spread but really, this boils down to common sense. If users are dumb enough to compromise their systems, they should pay the price.

Not to mention the fact that there will always be people ready and willing to try to break/bypass these limits. MS will inevitably enter another "patch war" with the hobbyists.