Re: UserControl looks different

Laurent,

This is exactly what I did. I compiled a UserForm into a dll and loaded
it in two ways:
once in a normal windows forms application, and once as a part of the
web page. The control looks different on each.


Laurent Bugnion [ASP.NET MVP] wrote:
Hi,

eransha wrote:
Eliyahu,

Thanks for the response. But both window form and browser "see" the
same graphic dlls when it comes to .net GUI, otherwise what's the point
in desiging the GUI of a user control if it ends up totaly different?

I think you are confused about ASP.NET. In WinForms applications, the
rendering engine is .NET on Windows. The controls look accordingly. On
ASP.NET, however, the rendering engine is the web browser's HTML engine.
It's a totally different environment, not even mentioning a different
application model. The fact that it's a User control doesn't change it.

That said, there is a possibility to expose WinForms user controls on IE
only, and on Windows only, as an ActiveX control. The .NET framework
must be installed on the client. Is that what you want?

http://www.codeproject.com/cs/miscctrl/htmlwincontrol.asp

I wouldn't recommend it, though.

HTH,
Laurent
--
Laurent Bugnion [MVP ASP.NET]
Software engineering: http://www.galasoft-LB.ch
PhotoAlbum: http://www.galasoft-LB.ch/pictures
Support children in Calcutta: http://www.calcutta-espoir.ch

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: UserControl looks different
    ... same graphic dlls when it comes to .net GUI, ... On ASP.NET, however, the rendering engine is the web browser's HTML engine. ... The fact that it's a User control doesn't change it. ... That said, there is a possibility to expose WinForms user controls on IE only, and on Windows only, as an ActiveX control. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • Re: VB Source code in 98 vs. XP
    ... > No, not any user control. ... Please copy the DLL and register it in Windows 98, ... Check all of your other functions to make sure that they work with Windows ... make a note of it because that is the minimum operating system version to ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: .Net packaging/wrapper application?
    ... it just didn't work well in reality due to DLL ... Windows works is to look in the executable's directory for a needed DLL ... the way apps used to work when they developed Windows. ... Looks to me like Jim is looking for the .NET equivalent of compiling ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • Re: Unnown process... 5eplorer.exe
    ... do not remove the cause (a "super"-hidden .dll program) but only remove ... symptom files and registry settings. ... It has all permissions but 'copy' denied to everyone, ... then by using the Windows XP Recovery Console. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.general)
  • Re: WinSxS, functional under 2k ?
    ... The newSide-by-Side Assembly technology was introduced with Windows XP to help reduce or eliminate DLL Hell. ... If you recall earlier Windows versions, like Windows 95, when you installed an application you were warned if the installer tried to replace a DLL from the system folder with an older version and you were asked if you wanted to accept the change. ... Until Windows XP it wasn't so easy to use different versions of shared system DLLs, that is what the new Side-by-Side assemblies attempts to resolve. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.general)