Simon,
That rant was not at all necessary. Dr. Newcomer has decades of
experience, and on a daily basis, he helps about 10 people for each
one he pisses off. I'd prefer that he take a less condescending tone
in most of his emails. He gets pretty upset about things that have
annoyed him for years. Those who learn from him often get irritated
and insulted in the process, but the lesson still gets taught most of
the time.
And there is nothing wrong with that, (but some might argue that this is
the wrong NG for a life lesson), the problem is when he randomly insults
people like he did here and in other threads.
Insulting people simply because they have not followed his life textbook
is not helpful, (and almost always impractical in real world businesses).
It doesn't teach hobbyist how to develop and it does not help developers
meeting various project requirements.
By the way, you still seem to have missed the point that
uninstalling IE doesn't have anything to do with uninstalling MSHTML.
MSHTML will be there, but it's not a matter of "IE not really been
uninstalled". MSHTML is not part of IE.
Really, am I looking at the same thread?
- I ask for a function API to output HTML.
-- Goran suggests using CHtmlView
--- I reply that I have nothing against using CHtmlView but I have
concerns about users not having IE installed.
---- Goran thinks that mshtml.dll is still around even if the ie.exe
might not be.
---- Joe tells me that I am confused.
----- I reply to his insult by showing that many sites offer ways of
completely removing IE, (to me, uninstalling means removing everything
including the HTML/DLL engine).
------ Alex points out that dependencies are probably not removed.
------- Joe insists that I am confused.
------- David suggests that this might not entirely be true, (but that
if the DLL is missing it is probably the fault of the user).
Where does it look like I am confused?
I ask for an API, someone suggests embedding IE, and I am then told that
I confuse IE with one, (or more), DLLs, (that apparently is not really
part of IE after all).
If the DLL has really nothing to do with IE then people must stop using
terms like 'embedding IE' in your app.
Either way, throwing insults around was not helpful in this case. Joe
could have called me 'confused' 200 times, that would not have helped.
Telling Alex and others that actually IE is not embedded at all but that
a DLL is needed, would have been a lot more useful.
Hell, maybe someone should tell MS that they are also 'confused',
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/42h6dke4%28VS.80%29.aspx)
"The WebBrowser ActiveX control (and therefore CHtmlView) is available
only to programs running under Windows NT versions 4.0 or later, in
which Internet Explorer 4.0 or later has been installed."
Joe should tell them that they are confused and that only the DLL is
needed.
Simon.
True enough. You may recall (or maybe not) that for many years, the Windows OS and the Internet Explorer product were tightly
enmeshed, and it wasn't really clear where the line was drawn. They always were together, and the OS depended on components that
were also depended upon by the IE browser. Since they were so tightly bound, the separation wasn't clear. Then, Microsoft was sued
for forcing the IE browser upon Windows users. It was considered an unfair advantage. So MS had to devise a way to separate them
and allow users to have Windows without IE. The other OS still have some dependencies on the ability to display HTML even if IE is
not installed. Thus, MSHTML can be there even if IE is not. If people have chosen to remove it, I'd say they brought the pain upon