how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
|
OZOPremium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2 | reply to Ctrl Alt Del
Re: Firefox 3 honors Windows Security Zones... said by Ctrl Alt Del:shdocvw.dll is a system shared component for anything that needs HTML or hyperlinking (which includes Outlook, the Help system). shdocvw.dll is not Internet Explorer. shdocvw.dll is one of many components that make up Internet Explorer. Saying that shdocvw.dll (component) is the same as Internet Explorer (application) is like saying Hydrogen (H, atom) is the same as Water (H2O, molecule). Thus, I say that IAttachmentExecute is a feature provided by the operating system in a resource that is currently used by the supplied web browser, email system, etc. You've made a lot of efforts explaining what shdocvw.dll is and why it's not IE, but, at the same time, why it's an important component for an HTML browser.
Let me ask you a question - why FF doesn't use that important component then?
Isn't that because the security model of IE (based on mentioned component) is flaky (as many of users see it, I'm not one of them, BTW) and over-convoluted (as I see it) to the level that the user needs something different? If the reason to develop a new browser is not an offering of a new security model, then why do that at all? If the answer is "yes, it's not what we need", then why there is an urge to repeat the same security model in the FF.3?
Some browsers (e.g. Maxthon or MyIE) do benefit from that component (shdocvw.dll). Many web site developers will then say a big thanks for not developing and testing their sites for two different rendering engines used by IE and FF. I know they certainly will appreciate *that* simplification (there are other drawbacks though)... So, why we need yet another browser (FF.3) that is based on the same security model of IE, but offering a different rendering engine (a headache for web developers and users, who suffer from various formattings of web pages in different brothers)?
P.S. Sorry, but this post looks more like a rant from my side leading away from the subject of the thread, so you may want not to answer the questions above...
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself... | | |
|
| said by OZO:You've made a lot of efforts explaining what shdocvw.dll is and why it's not IE, but, at the same time, why it's an important component for an HTML browser. Let me ask you a question - why FF doesn't use that important component then? Because Firefox uses its own HTML rendering engine: Gecko. Firefox is an entire web browser with no dependencies on external components. If Firefox used shdocvw.exe, then it could become another browser that is basically a new shell on top of the core from IE (Maxthon, MyIE).
This Wikipedia article does a good job at describing the IE architecture: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_E···itecture
Files hosted by the Internet Explorer main executable, iexplore.exe:
- WinInet.dll: handles HTTP and FTP.
- URlMon.dll: handles MIME-type stuff.
- MSHTML.dll: contains the Trident rendering engine which is responsible for displaying the pages on-screen and handling the Document Object Model of the web pages.
- ShDocVw.dll: provides the navigation, local caching and history functionalities.
- BrowseUI.dll: responsible for the browser user interface, including the browser chrome, which houses all the menus and toolbars.
ShDocVw.dll also apparently contains the API for the Attachment Manager. I guess it made the most sense to stick a feature that deals with downloaded files in a DLL that is used by IE.
said by OZO:Some browsers (e.g. Maxthon or MyIE) do benefit from that component ( shdocvw.dll). Many web site developers will then say a big thanks for not developing and testing their sites for two different rendering engines used by IE and FF. I know they certainly will appreciate *that* simplification (there are other drawbacks though)... So, why we need yet another browser (FF.3) that is based on the same security model of IE, but offering a different rendering engine (a headache for web developers and users, who suffer from various formattings of web pages in different brothers)? Because it's good to have choice? Yes, Firefox is a different web browser with its own rendering engine. But, that's why we have web standards. Some web browsers aren't as good as others, but aside from nuances, both give you a webpage with the important stuff in the right place.
--
less talk, more music | |
|
