+1, and I'd argue that calling non-standard chrome features "standards" is what makes it the new IE.

This is plain bad faith. If you know anything about web standards, you already know the W3C process requires candidate implementations and interoperability before a standard reaches its later stages. Other browsers implemented the standards earlier because they participated in that process; calling those implementations "non-standard chrome/etc features" is absurd.

Later stages? These features often get implemented at the working draft stage - a stage where major changes can still happen, it has no consensus or even wide review.

Google implementing a draft they themselves authored with minimal review doesn't make it standard just because w3c publishes the draft.

When chrome/firefox/opera all implement a working draft and demonstrate interoperability, they are participating in the standards process. Trying to make it sound like they're doing something non-standard when they do that is simply dishonest.