|
code
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
I'll buy you a latte........or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help me
find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting a webbrowser activex control. OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite beverages. One for you and one for a friend. jim I dont have any freinds because Im a recluse, and I only drink tap water.
I have done this before, so I know its possible, but I dont have a sample to share unfortunately. Show quote :-) "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help > me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting > a webbrowser activex control. > > OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite > beverages. One for you and one for a friend. > > jim > > > What would it take for you to reach way down in the basement of your mind
and reproduce an example? jim Show quote "Just Me" <news.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:eCyz6YF%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >I dont have any freinds because Im a recluse, and I only drink tap water. > > > I have done this before, so I know its possible, but I dont have a sample > to share unfortunately. > > :-) > > > > > "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message > news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help >> me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting >> a webbrowser activex control. >> >> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >> beverages. One for you and one for a friend. >> >> jim >> >> >> > > Did you try googling for
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22webbrowser+activex+control%22+%22asp.net%22 ??? The first link returned is : http://support.microsoft.com/kb/311294 Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 > that shows a webpage hosting a webbrowser activex control. > > OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite beverages. One for you and one for a friend. > > jim > > > Goggled til I turned blue.....
The first link returned has nothing to do with hosting a webbrowser activex control in a webpage. It is about hosting a webbrowser control (different from a webbrowser activex control now that there is a crippled webbrowser control included in the .Net toolbox) and using it to post to a webpage. Thanks though..... Show quote "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:%23FbyPhF%23HHA.748@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Did you try googling for > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22webbrowser+activex+control%22+%22asp.net%22 > > ??? > > The first link returned is : > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/311294 > > > > > Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP > asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ > foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ > ====================================== > "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message > news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help >> me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting >> a webbrowser activex control. >> >> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >> beverages. One for you and one for a friend. >> >> jim >> >> >> > > re:
!> The first link returned has nothing to do with hosting a webbrowser activex !> control in a webpage. It is about hosting a webbrowser control (different !> from a webbrowser activex control now that there is a crippled webbrowser !> control included in the .Net toolbox) and using it to post to a webpage If that's so, the guy who wrote the article doesn't know what he's writing about when he writes that : <quote> "This article discusses how to use the *WebBrowser ActiveX control* in Microsoft Visual Basic .NET to post form data." </quote> How is the *WebBrowser ActiveX control*, which the article describes, different from the "webbrowser activex control" which you are referring to ? What does what you refer to as a "webbrowser activex control" do, which the *WebBrowser ActiveX control* described in the article doesn't do, in your judgment ? Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:4jaHi.95409$pu2.76749@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > Goggled til I turned blue..... > > The first link returned has nothing to do with hosting a webbrowser activex control in a webpage. It is about hosting > a webbrowser control (different from a webbrowser activex control now that there is a crippled webbrowser control > included in the .Net toolbox) and using it to post to a webpage. > > Thanks though..... > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:%23FbyPhF%23HHA.748@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> Did you try googling for >> >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22webbrowser+activex+control%22+%22asp.net%22 >> >> ??? >> >> The first link returned is : >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/311294 >> >> >> >> >> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP >> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ >> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ >> ====================================== >> "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>> ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help me find a working code sample in VB.Net >>> 2005 that shows a webpage hosting a webbrowser activex control. >>> >>> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite beverages. One for you and one for a friend. >>> >>> jim >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
Show quote
"Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message Please take note of the portion "to post form data". This is a use of the news:OPhE5jG%23HHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > re: > !> The first link returned has nothing to do with hosting a webbrowser > activex > !> control in a webpage. It is about hosting a webbrowser control > (different > !> from a webbrowser activex control now that there is a crippled > webbrowser > !> control included in the .Net toolbox) and using it to post to a webpage > > If that's so, the guy who wrote the article doesn't know what he's writing > about when he writes that : > > <quote> > "This article discusses how to use the *WebBrowser ActiveX control* > in Microsoft Visual Basic .NET to post form data." > </quote> activex control (I was wrong in stating that it was not), but it is not in a webpage. The author explicitly states that the control is used on a windows form under the "Create the Visual Basic .Net Sample Project" heading. > How is the *WebBrowser ActiveX control*, which the article describes, I made a mistake and was thinking of another article to which I was also > different from the "webbrowser activex control" which you are referring to > ? > > What does what you refer to as a "webbrowser activex control" do, > which the *WebBrowser ActiveX control* described in the article doesn't > do, in your judgment ? replying at the time. The link that you gave does show the use of the webbrowser activex control (not the pitiful webbrowser control built into the .Net toolbox that I referred to). However, the web is littered with examples of using the webbrowser control (both activex and .Net versions) in windows forms. What I need to do is to use it in a webpage to fulfill the requirements for this project. jim re:
!> What I need to do is to use it in a webpage to fulfill the requirements for this project I'll refer you to my just-sent reply. You need to be more specific. Exactly, *what* do you want to achieve with a webbrowser control, that can't be achieved using an Iframe or the webClient .Net class ? Tools have specific uses. Using a hammer as a screwdriver isn't likely to be better than using a screwdriver. Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:sQaHi.95589$pu2.36064@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:OPhE5jG%23HHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> re: >> !> The first link returned has nothing to do with hosting a webbrowser activex >> !> control in a webpage. It is about hosting a webbrowser control (different >> !> from a webbrowser activex control now that there is a crippled webbrowser >> !> control included in the .Net toolbox) and using it to post to a webpage >> >> If that's so, the guy who wrote the article doesn't know what he's writing about when he writes that : >> >> <quote> >> "This article discusses how to use the *WebBrowser ActiveX control* >> in Microsoft Visual Basic .NET to post form data." >> </quote> > > Please take note of the portion "to post form data". This is a use of the activex control (I was wrong in stating > that it was not), but it is not in a webpage. The author explicitly states that the control is used on a windows form > under the "Create the Visual Basic .Net Sample Project" heading. > >> How is the *WebBrowser ActiveX control*, which the article describes, >> different from the "webbrowser activex control" which you are referring to ? >> >> What does what you refer to as a "webbrowser activex control" do, >> which the *WebBrowser ActiveX control* described in the article doesn't do, in your judgment ? > > I made a mistake and was thinking of another article to which I was also replying at the time. The link that you gave > does show the use of the webbrowser activex control (not the pitiful webbrowser control built into the .Net toolbox > that I referred to). > > However, the web is littered with examples of using the webbrowser control (both activex and .Net versions) in windows > forms. What I need to do is to use it in a webpage to fulfill the requirements for this project. > > jim > > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message What do I want to achieve? I want to keep my job. I have been given the news:eXLArzG%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > re: > !> What I need to do is to use it in a webpage to fulfill the requirements > for this project > > I'll refer you to my just-sent reply. You need to be more specific. > > Exactly, *what* do you want to achieve with a webbrowser control, > that can't be achieved using an Iframe or the webClient .Net class ? assinine task to create a webpage that hosts a webbrowser control to show as an example in a beginner's class on activex controls within the company. That is my task. Did I object? Sure. But, it didn't do a damned bit of good. They want what they want - logic be damned. Is that a good enough explanation for you? And, now that we have spent so much time together, do you have the requested information or not? I am really under a tight deadline and must concentrate on solving this problem. Thanks for your interest. jim re:
!> What do I want to achieve? I want to keep my job. I have been given the !> assinine task to create a webpage that hosts a webbrowser control to show as !> an example in a beginner's class on activex controls within the company. Tell them it's an assinine request which doesn't make any sense, for the reasons which have been explained to you. re: !> Is that a good enough explanation for you? Nope. It's an explanation, but not a justiffication. You should tell whomever it was who gave you that "task", that there's better instruments to achieve what they request. Specifically, tell them that Iframes and the webClient class can do what they request...without embedding a web browser inside another web browser. re: !> And, now that we have spent so much time together, do you have the requested information or not? I feel that I'd be giving you inforrmation which will serve for you to hang yourself. As said before, hammers should be used as hammers, not as screwdrivers. re: !> I am really under a tight deadline and must concentrate on solving this problem <shrug> I wouldn't waste any time on a "problem" which is not a logical problem. You should save your effforts for *real* problems...and you should tell whomever it was that requested you dedicate effort to solve a non-problem, that there's better ways to do what they requested. Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:R7bHi.95688$pu2.10399@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:eXLArzG%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> re: >> !> What I need to do is to use it in a webpage to fulfill the requirements for this project >> >> I'll refer you to my just-sent reply. You need to be more specific. >> >> Exactly, *what* do you want to achieve with a webbrowser control, >> that can't be achieved using an Iframe or the webClient .Net class ? > > What do I want to achieve? I want to keep my job. I have been given the assinine task to create a webpage that hosts > a webbrowser control to show as an example in a beginner's class on activex controls within the company. > > That is my task. Did I object? Sure. But, it didn't do a damned bit of good. They want what they want - logic be > damned. > > Is that a good enough explanation for you? > > And, now that we have spent so much time together, do you have the requested information or not? I am really under a > tight deadline and must concentrate on solving this problem. > > Thanks for your interest. > > jim > > > I think the main question here would be "why do you want to host a webbrowser
control in a web page?". In other words, what is the goal? -- Peter Recursion: see Recursion site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com unBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com BlogMetaFinder: http://www.blogmetafinder.com Show quote "jim" wrote: > ....or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help me > find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting a > webbrowser activex control. > > OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite beverages. > One for you and one for a friend. > > jim > > > > To show and extreme version of the ability of activeX controls to be hosted
in different environments. What's more extreme than hosting a control inside another instance of itself to show the flexibility and usability of activex controls? Doing so on a webpage simply drives home the fact that you are viewing a control via in instance of that same control. At least that's what I'm being told..... jim Show quote "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromb***@yahoo.yohohhoandabottleofrum.com> wrote in message news:7C3C5187-79D6-4D67-8668-04C8AFA0E8ED@microsoft.com... >I think the main question here would be "why do you want to host a >webbrowser > control in a web page?". > In other words, what is the goal? > -- Peter > Recursion: see Recursion > site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com > unBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com > BlogMetaFinder: http://www.blogmetafinder.com > > > > "jim" wrote: > >> ....or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can >> help me >> find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting a >> webbrowser activex control. >> >> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >> beverages. >> One for you and one for a friend. >> >> jim >> >> >> >> You did not answer Peter's question :
What do you want the webbrowser control to do ? Why would you host a webbrowser inside a web browser ? If you want to display info...you can use an Iframe. If you want to scrape info from another server, you can use the WebClient class. Specifically, why do you want to embed a webbrowser control into a web browser ? Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:dIaHi.95547$pu2.56821@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > > To show and extreme version of the ability of activeX controls to be hosted in different environments. What's more > extreme than hosting a control inside another instance of itself to show the flexibility and usability of activex > controls? > > Doing so on a webpage simply drives home the fact that you are viewing a control via in instance of that same control. > > At least that's what I'm being told..... > > jim > > "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromb***@yahoo.yohohhoandabottleofrum.com> wrote in message > news:7C3C5187-79D6-4D67-8668-04C8AFA0E8ED@microsoft.com... >>I think the main question here would be "why do you want to host a webbrowser >> control in a web page?". >> In other words, what is the goal? >> -- Peter >> Recursion: see Recursion >> site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com >> unBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com >> BlogMetaFinder: http://www.blogmetafinder.com >> >> >> >> "jim" wrote: >> >>> ....or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help me >>> find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting a >>> webbrowser activex control. >>> >>> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite beverages. >>> One for you and one for a friend. >>> >>> jim >>> >>> >>> >>> > > Juan, thanks for your interest, but please go away.
You obviously have no information that would help to attain the ridiculous goals that my management staff is requiring of me and you seem to be "one of those" argumentative MVPs that are more full of themselves than full of knowledge. (I've run into them before.) If you really knew how to host the webbrowser control in a webpage, you would not give a tinker's damn as to why and would simply answer the question, get your lattes and be on your way. But, argument seems to be your goal - not the spreading of knowledge to one who is on desperate need of it. If Peter does not understand my response, I am sure that he is quite capable of expressing that. Your post here shows that you are simply out to stir up crap. I am blocking your posts now because I have a coding problem to solve and simply do not have the time to waste with your argumentative hogwash. jim Show quote "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:OiZ14wG%23HHA.700@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > You did not answer Peter's question : > > What do you want the webbrowser control to do ? > Why would you host a webbrowser inside a web browser ? > > If you want to display info...you can use an Iframe. > If you want to scrape info from another server, you can use the WebClient > class. > > Specifically, why do you want to embed a webbrowser control into a web > browser ? > > > > > Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP > asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ > foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ > ====================================== > "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message > news:dIaHi.95547$pu2.56821@bignews1.bellsouth.net... >> >> To show and extreme version of the ability of activeX controls to be >> hosted in different environments. What's more extreme than hosting a >> control inside another instance of itself to show the flexibility and >> usability of activex controls? >> >> Doing so on a webpage simply drives home the fact that you are viewing a >> control via in instance of that same control. >> >> At least that's what I'm being told..... >> >> jim >> >> "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromb***@yahoo.yohohhoandabottleofrum.com> >> wrote in message >> news:7C3C5187-79D6-4D67-8668-04C8AFA0E8ED@microsoft.com... >>>I think the main question here would be "why do you want to host a >>>webbrowser >>> control in a web page?". >>> In other words, what is the goal? >>> -- Peter >>> Recursion: see Recursion >>> site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com >>> unBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com >>> BlogMetaFinder: http://www.blogmetafinder.com >>> >>> >>> >>> "jim" wrote: >>> >>>> ....or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can >>>> help me >>>> find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting >>>> a >>>> webbrowser activex control. >>>> >>>> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >>>> beverages. >>>> One for you and one for a friend. >>>> >>>> jim >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > re:
!> attain the ridiculous goals that my management staff is requiring of me All that I'm saying is that you should tell them it's a ridiculous goal, and you admit it is. re: !> Juan, thanks for your interest, but please go away Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile problems. Since you admit that the goal which has been set for you is ridiculous, if I were you, I'd consider *not posting ridiculous goals to this newsgroup*. re: !> "one of those" argumentative MVPs that are more full of themselves than full of knowledge Hey, I've given you solid reasons. If you think they are "argumentative", you should consider why you think that way. Of course, you can waste your time as you see fit, but wasting the valuable time of many people who subscribe to this newsgroup in order to find answers to real problems, or to help, like 2 MVPs have already attempted to help you, seems odd. Good luck with the ridiculous goal, as you yourself describe it, you've been tasked with. Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:oebHi.95709$pu2.58098@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > Juan, thanks for your interest, but please go away. > > You obviously have no information that would help to attain the ridiculous goals that my management staff is requiring > of me and you seem to be "one of those" argumentative MVPs that are more full of themselves than full of knowledge. > (I've run into them before.) > > If you really knew how to host the webbrowser control in a webpage, you would not give a tinker's damn as to why and > would simply answer the question, get your lattes and be on your way. But, argument seems to be your goal - not the > spreading of knowledge to one who is on desperate need of it. > > If Peter does not understand my response, I am sure that he is quite capable of expressing that. Your post here shows > that you are simply out to stir up crap. > > I am blocking your posts now because I have a coding problem to solve and simply do not have the time to waste with > your argumentative hogwash. > > jim > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:OiZ14wG%23HHA.700@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >> You did not answer Peter's question : >> >> What do you want the webbrowser control to do ? >> Why would you host a webbrowser inside a web browser ? >> >> If you want to display info...you can use an Iframe. >> If you want to scrape info from another server, you can use the WebClient class. >> >> Specifically, why do you want to embed a webbrowser control into a web browser ? >> >> >> >> >> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP >> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ >> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ >> ====================================== >> "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:dIaHi.95547$pu2.56821@bignews1.bellsouth.net... >>> >>> To show and extreme version of the ability of activeX controls to be hosted in different environments. What's more >>> extreme than hosting a control inside another instance of itself to show the flexibility and usability of activex >>> controls? >>> >>> Doing so on a webpage simply drives home the fact that you are viewing a control via in instance of that same >>> control. >>> >>> At least that's what I'm being told..... >>> >>> jim >>> >>> "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]" <pbromb***@yahoo.yohohhoandabottleofrum.com> wrote in message >>> news:7C3C5187-79D6-4D67-8668-04C8AFA0E8ED@microsoft.com... >>>>I think the main question here would be "why do you want to host a webbrowser >>>> control in a web page?". >>>> In other words, what is the goal? >>>> -- Peter >>>> Recursion: see Recursion >>>> site: http://www.eggheadcafe.com >>>> unBlog: http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com >>>> BlogMetaFinder: http://www.blogmetafinder.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "jim" wrote: >>>> >>>>> ....or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help me >>>>> find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting a >>>>> webbrowser activex control. >>>>> >>>>> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite beverages. >>>>> One for you and one for a friend. >>>>> >>>>> jim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile > problems. ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even if it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of those posts. It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving.
Show quote
"Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message Thanks Scott.news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >> problems. > > I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is > ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any > other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even if > it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize > the validity of those posts. > > It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear > that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has the > kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the powers > that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your boss > happy is a problem worth solving. And, since this information seems so difficult to find, should I find it - I will host a webpage with the source code so that others may learn from it. jim re:
!> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is !> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this Actually, all MVPs do that. Doing it helps all of us save our time. re: !> People are free to post any question they want (even if it is ludicrous) Of course, they are free to do that. I am also free to point out that it's a question with no valid answer. I never called his question "ludicrous". *He* called it a "ridiculous task", and I pointed out that insisting on getting an answer for an impossible task is a waste of everybody's time. I hope you don't mind that. re: !> it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of those posts I am not "editorializing", but thanks for the characterization. I *did* post my opinion that he's saddled with a task for which there are better tools than the one his superiors mistakenly think is the ideal tool for the job he was assigned. I pointed them out, in fact. re: !> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. He was given a very strong opinion to not attempt to use that tool, because it's the wrong tool for what he was tasked. Peter also asked him the correct questions : "why do you want to host a webbrowser control in a web page? In other words, what is the goal?" If the answer is "to keep my boss happy", I'm sorry, I cannot honestly recommend that he do it by pulling wool over his boss's eyes. re: !> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Actually, he does have a choice : educating his boss. re: !> I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. I'd say that giving your boss the *right* answers is even better. That, long-term, will keep him happier...and your job safer. Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile problems. > > I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a > moderator for this (or any other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even if it is > ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of those posts. > > It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been > asked. Not everyone has the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the powers that be that > their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message No Juan, all MVP's try to be helpful and make suggestions on how to get good news:OaJbvwH%23HHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > re: > !> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is > !> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this > > Actually, all MVPs do that. Doing it helps all of us save our time. use of NG's. There is nothing about your responses here that have done that. > But, when your response has been acknowledged and you have been asked to not > re: > !> People are free to post any question they want (even if it is > ludicrous) > > Of course, they are free to do that. > I am also free to point out that it's a question with no valid answer. make further comment as they are not helping the OP, it would seem wise to leave well enough alone. > You are making a determination about the validity of the task Jim has and > I never called his question "ludicrous". *He* called it a "ridiculous > task", > and I pointed out that insisting on getting an answer for an impossible > task > is a waste of everybody's time. I hope you don't mind that. > > re: > !> it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of > those posts > > I am not "editorializing", but thanks for the characterization. dissmissing it. That is the definition of editorializing. > Yes, and he has said that your opinion is not viable or helpful, yet you > I *did* post my opinion that he's saddled with a task for which there are > better tools > than the one his superiors mistakenly think is the ideal tool for the job > he was assigned. > > I pointed them out, in fact. > > re: > !> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. > > He was given a very strong opinion to not attempt to use that tool, > because it's the wrong tool for what he was tasked. persist. > Now, who's off topic?> Peter also asked him the correct questions : > > "why do you want to host a webbrowser control in a web page? > In other words, what is the goal?" > > If the answer is "to keep my boss happy", I'm sorry, > I cannot honestly recommend that he do it by pulling wool over his boss's > eyes. > Do you know where he works? Do you know his boss? I thought not.> re: > !> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. > > Actually, he does have a choice : educating his boss. > Perhaps Jim hasn't been "asked" a question to which an answer is expected or > re: > !> I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. > > I'd say that giving your boss the *right* answers is even better. > That, long-term, will keep him happier...and your job safer. wanted. Perhaps, he's been given an assignment that needs immediate completion. As a teacher, I know that we very often use examples in the classroom that we would certainly not use in the real-world, but if it can help to explain a concept, we do it and it can be very helpful. Show quote > > > > > Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP > asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ > foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ > ====================================== > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message > news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> >> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message >> news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >>> problems. >> >> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any >> other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even >> if it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to >> editorialize the validity of those posts. >> >> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear >> that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has >> the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the >> powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your >> boss happy is a problem worth solving. >> > > I'll refer you to Peter and Frankie's replies.
They do a much better job at explaining the problem than I ever could. Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ ====================================== Show quote "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:e$oLthI%23HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:OaJbvwH%23HHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> re: >> !> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >> !> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this >> >> Actually, all MVPs do that. Doing it helps all of us save our time. > > No Juan, all MVP's try to be helpful and make suggestions on how to get good use of NG's. There is nothing about your > responses here that have done that. > >> >> re: >> !> People are free to post any question they want (even if it is ludicrous) >> >> Of course, they are free to do that. >> I am also free to point out that it's a question with no valid answer. > > But, when your response has been acknowledged and you have been asked to not make further comment as they are not > helping the OP, it would seem wise to leave well enough alone. > >> >> I never called his question "ludicrous". *He* called it a "ridiculous task", >> and I pointed out that insisting on getting an answer for an impossible task >> is a waste of everybody's time. I hope you don't mind that. >> >> re: >> !> it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of those posts >> >> I am not "editorializing", but thanks for the characterization. > > You are making a determination about the validity of the task Jim has and dissmissing it. That is the definition of > editorializing. > >> >> I *did* post my opinion that he's saddled with a task for which there are better tools >> than the one his superiors mistakenly think is the ideal tool for the job he was assigned. >> >> I pointed them out, in fact. >> >> re: >> !> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. >> >> He was given a very strong opinion to not attempt to use that tool, >> because it's the wrong tool for what he was tasked. > > Yes, and he has said that your opinion is not viable or helpful, yet you persist. > >> >> Peter also asked him the correct questions : >> >> "why do you want to host a webbrowser control in a web page? >> In other words, what is the goal?" >> >> If the answer is "to keep my boss happy", I'm sorry, >> I cannot honestly recommend that he do it by pulling wool over his boss's eyes. > > Now, who's off topic? > >> >> re: >> !> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. >> >> Actually, he does have a choice : educating his boss. > > Do you know where he works? Do you know his boss? I thought not. > >> >> re: >> !> I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. >> >> I'd say that giving your boss the *right* answers is even better. >> That, long-term, will keep him happier...and your job safer. > > Perhaps Jim hasn't been "asked" a question to which an answer is expected or wanted. Perhaps, he's been given an > assignment that needs immediate completion. As a teacher, I know that we very often use examples in the classroom > that we would certainly not use in the real-world, but if it can help to explain a concept, we do it and it can be > very helpful. > >> >> >> >> >> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP >> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ >> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ >> ====================================== >> "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile problems. >>> >>> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a >>> moderator for this (or any other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even if it is >>> ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of those posts. >>> >>> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been >>> asked. Not everyone has the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the powers that be that >>> their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. >>> >> >> > > I'm not looking for an explanation to the problem. I'm simply saying that
you've made your point known and there's no point in proceeding with it. Show quote "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:egTJVkI%23HHA.396@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > I'll refer you to Peter and Frankie's replies. > They do a much better job at explaining the problem than I ever could. > > > > > Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP > asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ > foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ > ====================================== > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message > news:e$oLthI%23HHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> >> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message >> news:OaJbvwH%23HHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> re: >>> !> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >>> !> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this >>> >>> Actually, all MVPs do that. Doing it helps all of us save our time. >> >> No Juan, all MVP's try to be helpful and make suggestions on how to get >> good use of NG's. There is nothing about your responses here that have >> done that. >> >>> >>> re: >>> !> People are free to post any question they want (even if it is >>> ludicrous) >>> >>> Of course, they are free to do that. >>> I am also free to point out that it's a question with no valid answer. >> >> But, when your response has been acknowledged and you have been asked to >> not make further comment as they are not helping the OP, it would seem >> wise to leave well enough alone. >> >>> >>> I never called his question "ludicrous". *He* called it a "ridiculous >>> task", >>> and I pointed out that insisting on getting an answer for an impossible >>> task >>> is a waste of everybody's time. I hope you don't mind that. >>> >>> re: >>> !> it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize the validity of >>> those posts >>> >>> I am not "editorializing", but thanks for the characterization. >> >> You are making a determination about the validity of the task Jim has and >> dissmissing it. That is the definition of editorializing. >> >>> >>> I *did* post my opinion that he's saddled with a task for which there >>> are better tools >>> than the one his superiors mistakenly think is the ideal tool for the >>> job he was assigned. >>> >>> I pointed them out, in fact. >>> >>> re: >>> !> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. >>> >>> He was given a very strong opinion to not attempt to use that tool, >>> because it's the wrong tool for what he was tasked. >> >> Yes, and he has said that your opinion is not viable or helpful, yet you >> persist. >> >>> >>> Peter also asked him the correct questions : >>> >>> "why do you want to host a webbrowser control in a web page? >>> In other words, what is the goal?" >>> >>> If the answer is "to keep my boss happy", I'm sorry, >>> I cannot honestly recommend that he do it by pulling wool over his >>> boss's eyes. >> >> Now, who's off topic? >> >>> >>> re: >>> !> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. >>> >>> Actually, he does have a choice : educating his boss. >> >> Do you know where he works? Do you know his boss? I thought not. >> >>> >>> re: >>> !> I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. >>> >>> I'd say that giving your boss the *right* answers is even better. >>> That, long-term, will keep him happier...and your job safer. >> >> Perhaps Jim hasn't been "asked" a question to which an answer is expected >> or wanted. Perhaps, he's been given an assignment that needs immediate >> completion. As a teacher, I know that we very often use examples in the >> classroom that we would certainly not use in the real-world, but if it >> can help to explain a concept, we do it and it can be very helpful. >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Juan T. Llibre, asp.net MVP >>> asp.net faq : http://asp.net.do/faq/ >>> foros de asp.net, en español : http://asp.net.do/foros/ >>> ====================================== >>> "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message >>> news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>> >>>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message >>>> news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on >>>>> worthhile problems. >>>> >>>> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >>>> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or >>>> any other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want >>>> (even if it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to >>>> editorialize the validity of those posts. >>>> >>>> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear >>>> that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has >>>> the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the >>>> powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping >>>> your boss happy is a problem worth solving. >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > Scott:
RE: >> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile Actually, I did. Last Thrusday I asked Juan to be a moderator of this group >> problems. > > I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is > ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any > other newsgroup). and other newsgroups - and he is doing a great job! Seriously, though, it is entirely likely that the OP here has *not* been asked by his stupid boss to do this. Odds are he is just trying to use a hammer, possibly gold in color, where a screw driver would be far better. But even if I'm wrong about that and the gentleman posting the OP here is really telling the honest truth, that truth would tell us that he is a world-class brown-noser and will do whatever his boss asks - just to keep a job in a company that doesn't listen to reason. It's even worse than that. Apparently this obvious kludge is going to be presented in a class to educate people who - by definition [of being a student in the class] - wouldn't know any better. So it's not like this kludge isn't going to go anywhere. Why should we help a world-class brown noser perpetuate an ugly kludge well beyond some immediate project? (It's a rhetorical question). Separately, there are a lot of folks coming to this NG who don't have a strong technical background and are looking for ways to get their work done. They will read other posts and get ideas for how to accomplish various programming tasks. They simply aren't capable of decyphering - in the moment - what is a kludge and what isn't. So it is a very good thing that we have folks like Juan and the other more experienced developers - MVP or not - who point out the fact that some things are bad to do. It isn't that Juan or these more experienced developers *need* for someone to ask them to point out kludges. They can't help it - being (1) more knowledgeable and (2) wanting to promote best practices and standards - or at least help those less knowledgeable to understand what the implications of their actions are. It is obvious that many newer developers *don't* always understand the implications of their actions - so it is helpful for someone to help them to think it through. And for free! > It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. Nobody questioned that.> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. I didn't know he was posting from Gitmo> Not everyone has the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can True - but that doesn't mean that we should help him to do accomplish a > just tell the powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. kludge > I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. At all costs?-Frankie Show quote "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > > "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >> problems. > > I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is > ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any > other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even if > it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to editorialize > the validity of those posts. > > It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear > that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has the > kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the powers > that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your boss > happy is a problem worth solving. > The only thing in your post that is worth replying to is that no one said
Juan couldn't make his thoughts known. But, after doing so the first time, his subsequent replies have just been antagonistic and serve no purpose. The rest of your diatribe is purely speculation based on nothing. Show quote "Frankie" <A@B.COM> wrote in message news:uD3Kp3H%23HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > Scott: > > RE: >>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >>> problems. >> >> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any >> other newsgroup). > > Actually, I did. Last Thrusday I asked Juan to be a moderator of this > group and other newsgroups - and he is doing a great job! > > Seriously, though, it is entirely likely that the OP here has *not* been > asked by his stupid boss to do this. Odds are he is just trying to use a > hammer, possibly gold in color, where a screw driver would be far better. > But even if I'm wrong about that and the gentleman posting the OP here is > really telling the honest truth, that truth would tell us that he is a > world-class brown-noser and will do whatever his boss asks - just to keep > a job in a company that doesn't listen to reason. It's even worse than > that. Apparently this obvious kludge is going to be presented in a class > to educate people who - by definition [of being a student in the class] - > wouldn't know any better. So it's not like this kludge isn't going to go > anywhere. Why should we help a world-class brown noser perpetuate an ugly > kludge well beyond some immediate project? (It's a rhetorical question). > > Separately, there are a lot of folks coming to this NG who don't have a > strong technical background and are looking for ways to get their work > done. They will read other posts and get ideas for how to accomplish > various programming tasks. They simply aren't capable of decyphering - in > the moment - what is a kludge and what isn't. So it is a very good thing > that we have folks like Juan and the other more experienced developers - > MVP or not - who point out the fact that some things are bad to do. It > isn't that Juan or these more experienced developers *need* for someone to > ask them to point out kludges. They can't help it - being (1) more > knowledgeable and (2) wanting to promote best practices and standards - or > at least help those less knowledgeable to understand what the implications > of their actions are. It is obvious that many newer developers *don't* > always understand the implications of their actions - so it is helpful for > someone to help them to think it through. And for free! > > >> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. > > Nobody questioned that. > > >> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. > > I didn't know he was posting from Gitmo > >> Not everyone has the kind of employee/employer relationship where they >> can just tell the powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. > > True - but that doesn't mean that we should help him to do accomplish a > kludge > >> I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. > > At all costs? > > > -Frankie > > > > > "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message > news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >> >> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message >> news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >>> problems. >> >> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any >> other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even >> if it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to >> editorialize the validity of those posts. >> >> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear >> that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has >> the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the >> powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping your >> boss happy is a problem worth solving. >> > > RE:
RE: << his subsequent replies have just been antagonistic . >> There is absolutely nothing in Juan's replies that have been antagonistic. The fact that the OP got his panties in a bunch doesn't mean that is the effect Juan was intending - and it doesn't mean that such a respons on the part of the OP is justified. << and serve no purpose >> Wrong again. Juan's replies serve many useful purposes simultaneously. For starters, it keeps other neophytes from looking at the OP and going - " hey - cool - I wanna do that too". At least Juan's replies give them pause. It *could* have given the OP pause too - but he decided to become offended or somehow put out with the fact that the merits of his bad idea were called into question. Juans replies also serve the purpose of maintaining the integrity or usefulness of this NG. I could keep going... Finally, we *must* make assumptions and speculate about reality - otherwise we'd never get through life. So pointing out that I have speculated is, of course, accurate. Of course your posts here necessarily imply a whole lot of speculation on your part too. Nothing wrong with speculating. It's gotta be done! Okay, I've gotta get back to the game. The Colts are winning... Later (oh, and let's meet at Starbucks and discuss the meaning of life over a Latte! Mabe the OP's original offer still stands). -Frankie Show quote "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:%23xxsUjI%23HHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > The only thing in your post that is worth replying to is that no one said > Juan couldn't make his thoughts known. But, after doing so the first > time, his subsequent replies have just been antagonistic and serve no > purpose. The rest of your diatribe is purely speculation based on nothing. > > > "Frankie" <A@B.COM> wrote in message > news:uD3Kp3H%23HHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> >> Scott: >> >> RE: >>>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >>>> problems. >>> >>> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >>> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any >>> other newsgroup). >> >> Actually, I did. Last Thrusday I asked Juan to be a moderator of this >> group and other newsgroups - and he is doing a great job! >> >> Seriously, though, it is entirely likely that the OP here has *not* been >> asked by his stupid boss to do this. Odds are he is just trying to use a >> hammer, possibly gold in color, where a screw driver would be far better. >> But even if I'm wrong about that and the gentleman posting the OP here is >> really telling the honest truth, that truth would tell us that he is a >> world-class brown-noser and will do whatever his boss asks - just to keep >> a job in a company that doesn't listen to reason. It's even worse than >> that. Apparently this obvious kludge is going to be presented in a class >> to educate people who - by definition [of being a student in the class] - >> wouldn't know any better. So it's not like this kludge isn't going to go >> anywhere. Why should we help a world-class brown noser perpetuate an ugly >> kludge well beyond some immediate project? (It's a rhetorical question). >> >> Separately, there are a lot of folks coming to this NG who don't have a >> strong technical background and are looking for ways to get their work >> done. They will read other posts and get ideas for how to accomplish >> various programming tasks. They simply aren't capable of decyphering - in >> the moment - what is a kludge and what isn't. So it is a very good thing >> that we have folks like Juan and the other more experienced developers - >> MVP or not - who point out the fact that some things are bad to do. It >> isn't that Juan or these more experienced developers *need* for someone >> to ask them to point out kludges. They can't help it - being (1) more >> knowledgeable and (2) wanting to promote best practices and standards - >> or at least help those less knowledgeable to understand what the >> implications of their actions are. It is obvious that many newer >> developers *don't* always understand the implications of their actions - >> so it is helpful for someone to help them to think it through. And for >> free! >> >> >>> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. >> >> Nobody questioned that. >> >> >>> It's also clear that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. >> >> I didn't know he was posting from Gitmo >> >>> Not everyone has the kind of employee/employer relationship where they >>> can just tell the powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. >> >> True - but that doesn't mean that we should help him to do accomplish a >> kludge >> >>> I'd say keeping your boss happy is a problem worth solving. >> >> At all costs? >> >> >> -Frankie >> >> >> >> >> "Scott M." <s-mar@nospam.nospam> wrote in message >> news:emFm6hH%23HHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "Juan T. Llibre" <nomailrepl***@nowhere.com> wrote in message >>> news:uWpXkTH%23HHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> Actually, part of what I do is keep this newsgroup focused on worthhile >>>> problems. >>> >>> I couldn't help but jump into the fray here. That last comment is >>> ludicrous, since no one has asked you to be a moderator for this (or any >>> other newsgroup). People are free to post any question they want (even >>> if it is ludicrous) - it's not now, or ever, been YOUR job to >>> editorialize the validity of those posts. >>> >>> It's clear that Jim has a question related to the NG. It's also clear >>> that he has no choice in doing what he's been asked. Not everyone has >>> the kind of employee/employer relationship where they can just tell the >>> powers that be that their assignment is ridiculous. I'd say keeping >>> your boss happy is a problem worth solving. >>> >> >> > > Is it not true (I am pretty sure that this was the case way back) that to
use this control, the computer on which it is used need to have Internet Explorer installed? That certainly wouldn't be the case for a web server. Show quote "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... > ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help > me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting > a webbrowser activex control. > > OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite > beverages. One for you and one for a friend. > > jim > > > "William LaMartin" <lamar***@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message The activex control being used on the webpage should try and install on the news:uAlPa2G%23HHA.600@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Is it not true (I am pretty sure that this was the case way back) that to > use this control, the computer on which it is used need to have Internet > Explorer installed? That certainly wouldn't be the case for a web server. viewer's PC if IE is not already installed on the viewing PC. Seeing as how IE is installed on all Windows PCs, the only possible problem would be that of version of IE is installed on the viewer's PC. Even then, the viewing PC should try and install the activeX control and run the page. So far, the specs only call for using Windows PCs (for both server and clients). I haven't been directed to do the impossible and run an activex control on MAC or Linux just yet - but it wouldn't surprise me any if I were. jim Show quote > > "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message > news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can help >> me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage hosting >> a webbrowser activex control. >> >> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >> beverages. One for you and one for a friend. >> >> jim >> >> >> > >
Show quote
"jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message I don't think that the WebBrowser control in VB.Net 2005 would act that way. news:4jbHi.95724$pu2.66180@bignews1.bellsouth.net... > > "William LaMartin" <lamar***@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >> "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message >> news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>> ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can >>> help me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage >>> hosting a webbrowser activex control. >>> >>> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >>> beverages. One for you and one for a friend. >>> >>> jim Nor would Internet Explorer popup the Request to Install ActiveX control dialog like it would if you where going to a website that had content that required a particular control to be installed ( like Flash Player or something similar) to view that content. For one thing, if you are running Internet Explorer, there is already an instance of the control there. At the most, it would just pop up another instance of Internet Explorer and display the content. And I don't think you could get FireFox to do it either. At least, this is what I am getting from your statements. If I have mis-understood your question, I am sorry. But, that is what it appears to me you are trying to do. james
Show quote
"james" <jjames700REMOV***@earthlink.net> wrote in message There is an activex control for Firefox that could be used, but my boss news:ubT1WGK%23HHA.4568@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message > news:4jbHi.95724$pu2.66180@bignews1.bellsouth.net... >> >> "William LaMartin" <lamar***@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message >>> "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote in message >>> news:Pq8Hi.41896$Y7.23718@bignews3.bellsouth.net... >>>> ...or the beverage of your choice at your local Starbucks if you can >>>> help me find a working code sample in VB.Net 2005 that shows a webpage >>>> hosting a webbrowser activex control. >>>> >>>> OK....it *is* a crazy request.....so make that 2 of your favorite >>>> beverages. One for you and one for a friend. >>>> >>>> jim > > > I don't think that the WebBrowser control in VB.Net 2005 would act that > way. Nor would Internet Explorer > popup the Request to Install ActiveX control dialog like it would if you > where going to a website that had > content that required a particular control to be installed ( like Flash > Player or something similar) to view that > content. For one thing, if you are running Internet Explorer, there is > already an instance of the control there. > At the most, it would just pop up another instance of Internet Explorer > and display the content. > And I don't think you could get FireFox to do it either. > At least, this is what I am getting from your statements. > If I have mis-understood your question, I am sorry. But, that is what it > appears to me you are trying to do. > james specifically wants an IE activeX control hosted on a webpage that will be viewed with IE. This example of nesting controls seems to amuse him, and no matter how I argue that I can have another activex control on a web page rather quickly he still wants his IE activex control on a webpage to view it in IE. jim On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 19:43:27 -0400, "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote: What is meant by "his ActiveX control"? > >There is an activex control for Firefox that could be used, but my boss >specifically wants an IE activeX control hosted on a webpage that will be >viewed with IE. > >This example of nesting controls seems to amuse him, and no matter how I >argue that I can have another activex control on a web page rather quickly >he still wants his IE activex control on a webpage to view it in IE. > By itself the AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control isn't especially useful. The control needs a container that can expose a UI and programmatically interact with the control's properties, methods and events. Essentially this would be an ActiveX web browser control which contains an embedded AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control. Now embed the container in the webpage. Although I have done a lot of embedded IE in Java, Delphi, & C# I have never considered embedding a browser in a webpage. As such my suggestion is just a thought experiment that you might consider pursuing. regards A.G.
Show quote
"Registered User" <n4***@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message Just a figure of speech. It's the shdocvw.dll control that ships with IE news:5lmre3151t31vvdua361mfq3sdcci5lurg@4ax.com... > On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 19:43:27 -0400, "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote: > >> >>There is an activex control for Firefox that could be used, but my boss >>specifically wants an IE activeX control hosted on a webpage that will be >>viewed with IE. >> >>This example of nesting controls seems to amuse him, and no matter how I >>argue that I can have another activex control on a web page rather quickly >>he still wants his IE activex control on a webpage to view it in IE. >> > What is meant by "his ActiveX control"? that he wants implemented in a webpage. > That's a thought. Although (through much bitching an gnashing of teeth) I > By itself the AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control isn't especially useful. > The control needs a container that can expose a UI and > programmatically interact with the control's properties, methods and > events. Essentially this would be an ActiveX web browser control which > contains an embedded AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control. Now embed the > container in the webpage. have found that he wanted to use the IE control because it would not have to be registered or installed on most Windows PCs (depending on how updated the user's PC is of course). As far as interacting with the webcontrol in the webpage, Peter Bromberg [C# MVP] said "the native COM IE Web Control was never designed to be hosted in a web page via the <object clsid=.... tag arrangement. You would not be able to sink any events and that's just for starters. Check here for details: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q183048/". So, this whole thing may be futile. I really don't understand the thinking behind making the webbrowser control events and procedures NOT accessible from within a webpage. If Microsoft is known for anything, it's recursion. Just look at most of the objects in VB6 and VB.Net. They are almost all recursed in one way or another. The link Peter gave was for the IE4 webbrowser control. I had really hoped that had changed by IE7, but Peter also gave a code sample in a second post that I tested out and I got an error message in IE7 (fully patched) that said "Internet Explorer has blocked thsi site from using an ActiveX control in an unsafe manner. As a result, this page may not display correctly." This message and behavior is a result of new security measures in IE7. That alone will doom this task as we cannot really expect all users to lower their security settings (or even know how to) just to run this "educational webpage". So, I have a couple of lattes to hand out. 2 to Peter and 1 to you for your help also. Where is the nearest Starbucks? I'll phone in your orders. > Thank you for your suggestion. I also recommended an entirely different > Although I have done a lot of embedded IE in Java, Delphi, & C# I have > never considered embedding a browser in a webpage. As such my > suggestion is just a thought experiment that you might consider > pursuing. path. I recommended wrapping an IE application using Thinstall. That would also get rid of any requirements to install anything on the end user's PC. The end users would have to run the executable (just over 2.2MB) but there is no install or registering of components (even 3rd party components) required. Seems the objection to Thinstall is two-fold. (1) Price. Thinstall starts at $4,995 PER APPLICATION and before client licensing is considered. (2) Thinstall apps require lots more bandwidth than simply embedding a control that is already on most Windows PCs. I keep poking him for the real reason behind holding so steadfastly to a difficult solution to a simple problem of teaching about activex controls, but he's not cracking yet. It *has* to be something more than he's telling me. Thanks for your suggestions! jim After reading the hole post the following
1. the security popups would also occur with a custom VB6 activex control you even needed to sign the cab files to show a popup with green markers then it still required the explicit confirmation of the user ( this was already so with IE 4 ) 2. the security in IE has only gone stricter , 3. have you considered builing a smart application if i read your last post and understaqnd your requirments correctly , a .Net smart application would be a perfect substitute # Concept # http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_client user navigates to youw web / intranet page with a through explanation what wil happen , clicks the install link , the framework will install all necesary components automaticly and will launch the application, the application is actually delivered to the client throuh IE Hope to have given you some ideas regards Michel Show quote "jim" wrote: > > "Registered User" <n4***@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message > news:5lmre3151t31vvdua361mfq3sdcci5lurg@4ax.com... > > On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 19:43:27 -0400, "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote: > > > >> > >>There is an activex control for Firefox that could be used, but my boss > >>specifically wants an IE activeX control hosted on a webpage that will be > >>viewed with IE. > >> > >>This example of nesting controls seems to amuse him, and no matter how I > >>argue that I can have another activex control on a web page rather quickly > >>he still wants his IE activex control on a webpage to view it in IE. > >> > > What is meant by "his ActiveX control"? > > Just a figure of speech. It's the shdocvw.dll control that ships with IE > that he wants implemented in a webpage. > > > > > By itself the AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control isn't especially useful. > > The control needs a container that can expose a UI and > > programmatically interact with the control's properties, methods and > > events. Essentially this would be an ActiveX web browser control which > > contains an embedded AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control. Now embed the > > container in the webpage. > > That's a thought. Although (through much bitching an gnashing of teeth) I > have found that he wanted to use the IE control because it would not have to > be registered or installed on most Windows PCs (depending on how updated the > user's PC is of course). > > As far as interacting with the webcontrol in the webpage, Peter Bromberg [C# > MVP] said "the native COM IE Web Control was never designed to be hosted in > a web page via the <object clsid=.... tag arrangement. You would not be able > to sink any events and that's just for starters. Check here for details: > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q183048/". > > So, this whole thing may be futile. I really don't understand the thinking > behind making the webbrowser control events and procedures NOT accessible > from within a webpage. If Microsoft is known for anything, it's recursion. > Just look at most of the objects in VB6 and VB.Net. They are almost all > recursed in one way or another. > > The link Peter gave was for the IE4 webbrowser control. I had really hoped > that had changed by IE7, but Peter also gave a code sample in a second post > that I tested out and I got an error message in IE7 (fully patched) that > said "Internet Explorer has blocked thsi site from using an ActiveX control > in an unsafe manner. As a result, this page may not display correctly." > This message and behavior is a result of new security measures in IE7. > > That alone will doom this task as we cannot really expect all users to lower > their security settings (or even know how to) just to run this "educational > webpage". > > So, I have a couple of lattes to hand out. 2 to Peter and 1 to you for your > help also. Where is the nearest Starbucks? I'll phone in your orders. > > > > > Although I have done a lot of embedded IE in Java, Delphi, & C# I have > > never considered embedding a browser in a webpage. As such my > > suggestion is just a thought experiment that you might consider > > pursuing. > > Thank you for your suggestion. I also recommended an entirely different > path. I recommended wrapping an IE application using Thinstall. That would > also get rid of any requirements to install anything on the end user's PC. > The end users would have to run the executable (just over 2.2MB) but there > is no install or registering of components (even 3rd party components) > required. > > Seems the objection to Thinstall is two-fold. (1) Price. Thinstall starts > at $4,995 PER APPLICATION and before client licensing is considered. (2) > Thinstall apps require lots more bandwidth than simply embedding a control > that is already on most Windows PCs. > > I keep poking him for the real reason behind holding so steadfastly to a > difficult solution to a simple problem of teaching about activex controls, > but he's not cracking yet. It *has* to be something more than he's telling > me. > > Thanks for your suggestions! > > jim > > > hmm ...
That Link Cor provided looks verry promissing ,,, if you can throw a listbox , puzzle on a webform and display this on a web page. why would a webbrowser control fail ?? ... i have just tested the example ( Rich.exe downloadable from the link Cor provided ) and installed the files to my IIS directory after calling the file controls.html it just shows the 2 listboxes without displaying anny warning at all so i tested this from a remote client ( other computer on my LAN ) and again it shows the listboxes without anny warning at all i understood from the docu that this is functioning because it runs in an isolated storage . so i guess this is your solution , just throw a webbrowser control on the parent control and you have forfilled your task ( the example is C# but it is verry simple and with the link information it should be an easy task ) Seems like your boss is not such an idiot as some people thought :-) hth Michel Show quote "Michel Posseth [MCP]" wrote: > After reading the hole post the following > > 1. the security popups would also occur with a custom VB6 activex control > you even needed to sign the cab files to show a popup with green markers > then it still required the explicit confirmation of the user ( this was > already so with IE 4 ) > > 2. the security in IE has only gone stricter , > > 3. have you considered builing a smart application if i read your last post > and understaqnd your requirments correctly , a .Net smart application would > be a perfect substitute > > # Concept # > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_client > > user navigates to youw web / intranet page with a through explanation what > wil happen , clicks the install link , the framework will install all > necesary components automaticly and will launch the application, the > application is actually delivered to the client throuh IE > > > > Hope to have given you some ideas > > regards > > Michel > > > "jim" wrote: > > > > > "Registered User" <n4***@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message > > news:5lmre3151t31vvdua361mfq3sdcci5lurg@4ax.com... > > > On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 19:43:27 -0400, "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >>There is an activex control for Firefox that could be used, but my boss > > >>specifically wants an IE activeX control hosted on a webpage that will be > > >>viewed with IE. > > >> > > >>This example of nesting controls seems to amuse him, and no matter how I > > >>argue that I can have another activex control on a web page rather quickly > > >>he still wants his IE activex control on a webpage to view it in IE. > > >> > > > What is meant by "his ActiveX control"? > > > > Just a figure of speech. It's the shdocvw.dll control that ships with IE > > that he wants implemented in a webpage. > > > > > > > > By itself the AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control isn't especially useful. > > > The control needs a container that can expose a UI and > > > programmatically interact with the control's properties, methods and > > > events. Essentially this would be an ActiveX web browser control which > > > contains an embedded AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control. Now embed the > > > container in the webpage. > > > > That's a thought. Although (through much bitching an gnashing of teeth) I > > have found that he wanted to use the IE control because it would not have to > > be registered or installed on most Windows PCs (depending on how updated the > > user's PC is of course). > > > > As far as interacting with the webcontrol in the webpage, Peter Bromberg [C# > > MVP] said "the native COM IE Web Control was never designed to be hosted in > > a web page via the <object clsid=.... tag arrangement. You would not be able > > to sink any events and that's just for starters. Check here for details: > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q183048/". > > > > So, this whole thing may be futile. I really don't understand the thinking > > behind making the webbrowser control events and procedures NOT accessible > > from within a webpage. If Microsoft is known for anything, it's recursion. > > Just look at most of the objects in VB6 and VB.Net. They are almost all > > recursed in one way or another. > > > > The link Peter gave was for the IE4 webbrowser control. I had really hoped > > that had changed by IE7, but Peter also gave a code sample in a second post > > that I tested out and I got an error message in IE7 (fully patched) that > > said "Internet Explorer has blocked thsi site from using an ActiveX control > > in an unsafe manner. As a result, this page may not display correctly." > > This message and behavior is a result of new security measures in IE7. > > > > That alone will doom this task as we cannot really expect all users to lower > > their security settings (or even know how to) just to run this "educational > > webpage". > > > > So, I have a couple of lattes to hand out. 2 to Peter and 1 to you for your > > help also. Where is the nearest Starbucks? I'll phone in your orders. > > > > > > > > Although I have done a lot of embedded IE in Java, Delphi, & C# I have > > > never considered embedding a browser in a webpage. As such my > > > suggestion is just a thought experiment that you might consider > > > pursuing. > > > > Thank you for your suggestion. I also recommended an entirely different > > path. I recommended wrapping an IE application using Thinstall. That would > > also get rid of any requirements to install anything on the end user's PC. > > The end users would have to run the executable (just over 2.2MB) but there > > is no install or registering of components (even 3rd party components) > > required. > > > > Seems the objection to Thinstall is two-fold. (1) Price. Thinstall starts > > at $4,995 PER APPLICATION and before client licensing is considered. (2) > > Thinstall apps require lots more bandwidth than simply embedding a control > > that is already on most Windows PCs. > > > > I keep poking him for the real reason behind holding so steadfastly to a > > difficult solution to a simple problem of teaching about activex controls, > > but he's not cracking yet. It *has* to be something more than he's telling > > me. > > > > Thanks for your suggestions! > > > > jim > > > > > > The more I poke at the shriveled grey mass he affectionately calls his brain, the more specific he seems to get (which is expected of all end users/project managers I suppose). One of his (unspoken) goals was to be able to load this page without and installs (hence the use of the IE control) and avoid any problems with PCs that are locked down and may not allow the end users that are viewing the educational material the ability to install anything locally. I have looked at the link that you provided (thanks for that) and I have googled some results for .net smart client. It seems that the major hold up in using a smart client for this project is the requirement for .Net 2.0 to be pre-installed on the clients. As we will not have access to the PCs to make those changes for all that may view the web pages, we cannot make sure that this is the case. Additionaly, any user that wants to use click once apps and tries to install the .Net 2.0 framework must have admin privileges and we were trying to keep this in the browser to avoid installation issues like that. Your suggestion was a good avenue to pursue and brings up a couple of thoughts that I had on the subject of click once deplyoment. 1) It is quite obvious that the .Net framework is a key component of Microsoft's future plans for the Windows operating systems and applications written for them. So, why is the .Net framework an elective download? Why not push out such an important component of the overall Windows platform? Just doesn't make sense to me. 2) Why are click once apps' security settings dependent upon the location from which they are launched? Wouldn't it be better to alert a user that a particular app (no matter where it is launched from) is requesting (or requiring) specific permissions (like read/write access to program directories or the ability to edit the registry) and let the user make the call to (a) allow only certain behaviors, (b) trust the application or (c) trust the location and all apps lainched from it? I certainly think it would make click once deployment a more viable alternative for truly powerful desktop applications. 3) Thinstall is an application that can wrap your application into a single executable. It encapsulates all of the .Net framework needed to run your app - so the user does not have to have .Net installed. It also incorporates all COM components and DLLs into the EXE and requires NO REGISTRATION of these components to work. Thinstall even runs your app in a virtual sandbox and can obfuscate the whole thing for you. I can't, for the life of me, figure out why Microsoft has not incorporated this technology into the build and deployment cycle of .Net applications. Thanks again for your input. I love the idea of click once deployment, but with competing technologies like Thinstall out there - click once is years behind in application deployment technology. jim Show quote "Michel Posseth [MCP]" <MichelPosseth***@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:BC422D9A-F453-43DC-A9EB-21BF02D24E04@microsoft.com... > After reading the hole post the following > > 1. the security popups would also occur with a custom VB6 activex control > you even needed to sign the cab files to show a popup with green > markers > then it still required the explicit confirmation of the user ( this was > already so with IE 4 ) > > 2. the security in IE has only gone stricter , > > 3. have you considered builing a smart application if i read your last > post > and understaqnd your requirments correctly , a .Net smart application > would > be a perfect substitute > > # Concept # > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_client > > user navigates to youw web / intranet page with a through explanation > what > wil happen , clicks the install link , the framework will install all > necesary components automaticly and will launch the application, the > application is actually delivered to the client throuh IE > > > > Hope to have given you some ideas > > regards > > Michel > > > "jim" wrote: > >> >> "Registered User" <n4***@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message >> news:5lmre3151t31vvdua361mfq3sdcci5lurg@4ax.com... >> > On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 19:43:27 -0400, "jim" <j**@home.net> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >>There is an activex control for Firefox that could be used, but my boss >> >>specifically wants an IE activeX control hosted on a webpage that will >> >>be >> >>viewed with IE. >> >> >> >>This example of nesting controls seems to amuse him, and no matter how >> >>I >> >>argue that I can have another activex control on a web page rather >> >>quickly >> >>he still wants his IE activex control on a webpage to view it in IE. >> >> >> > What is meant by "his ActiveX control"? >> >> Just a figure of speech. It's the shdocvw.dll control that ships with IE >> that he wants implemented in a webpage. >> >> > >> > By itself the AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control isn't especially useful. >> > The control needs a container that can expose a UI and >> > programmatically interact with the control's properties, methods and >> > events. Essentially this would be an ActiveX web browser control which >> > contains an embedded AxSHDocVw.AxWebBrowser control. Now embed the >> > container in the webpage. >> >> That's a thought. Although (through much bitching an gnashing of teeth) >> I >> have found that he wanted to use the IE control because it would not have >> to >> be registered or installed on most Windows PCs (depending on how updated >> the >> user's PC is of course). >> >> As far as interacting with the webcontrol in the webpage, Peter Bromberg >> [C# >> MVP] said "the native COM IE Web Control was never designed to be hosted >> in >> a web page via the <object clsid=.... tag arrangement. You would not be >> able >> to sink any events and that's just for starters. Check here for details: >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/q183048/". >> >> So, this whole thing may be futile. I really don't understand the >> thinking >> behind making the webbrowser control events and procedures NOT accessible >> from within a webpage. If Microsoft is known for anything, it's >> recursion. >> Just look at most of the objects in VB6 and VB.Net. They are almost all >> recursed in one way or another. >> >> The link Peter gave was for the IE4 webbrowser control. I had really >> hoped >> that had changed by IE7, but Peter also gave a code sample in a second >> post >> that I tested out and I got an error message in IE7 (fully patched) that >> said "Internet Explorer has blocked thsi site from using an ActiveX >> control >> in an unsafe manner. As a result, this page may not display correctly." >> This message and behavior is a result of new security measures in IE7. >> >> That alone will doom this task as we cannot really expect all users to >> lower >> their security settings (or even know how to) just to run this >> "educational >> webpage". >> >> So, I have a couple of lattes to hand out. 2 to Peter and 1 to you for >> your >> help also. Where is the nearest Starbucks? I'll phone in your orders. >> >> > >> > Although I have done a lot of embedded IE in Java, Delphi, & C# I have >> > never considered embedding a browser in a webpage. As s | |||||||||||||||||||||||
