wsh(Windows Scripting Host), WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files)

WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files)

Author	Message
Richard M. Smit #1 / 5	WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files) Hello, I have a quick question about WSH. Now that IE5 supports HTML application files (ie, .HTA files), why do we need WSH anymore? HTML apps can do all the same things as WSH scripts plus one gets to use DHTML for writing user interface code and can generate HTML documents on the fly for reports. I'm just kind of curious why Microsoft has now released two very similar technologies....... Richard
Mon, 07 Jan 2002 03:00:00 GMT

Chris Lowd #2 / 5	WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files) WSH enables you to write scripts that perform functions that you used to use bat files for. The advantage of VBScript, or JScript, is that you can do allot more, including control applications. WSH is really a mechanism of invoking a script, and a set of objects that enable you to manipulate the file system. My scripts are primarily command line driven, and do things like configure systems. I would not want to do this from an HTML front end, it is more than I need. In reality HTML and WSH provide two ways to invoke scripts and so they are not the same, but the scripting languages that they can invoke are the same. Therefore there is no duplication in Microsoft's effort. Chris Lowde Quote: > Hello, > I have a quick question about WSH. Now that IE5 supports > HTML application files (ie, .HTA files), why do we need > WSH anymore? HTML apps can do all the same things > as WSH scripts plus one gets to use DHTML for writing > user interface code and can generate HTML documents > on the fly for reports. I'm just kind of curious why Microsoft > has now released two very similar technologies....... > Richard
Mon, 07 Jan 2002 03:00:00 GMT

Michael Harri #3 / 5	WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files) mshta.exe (the host for HTAs) is just a "kinder, gentler" IE without the security hassles or the overhead of fixed UI element (menus, toolbars, ...). There will _always_ be a place for WSH for non-interactive sorts of tasks, or those that simple interface requirements. But if you want a user interface (as simple or elaborate as you care to make it), HTAs are clearly the best choice short of a full-blown compiled application. Of course they do add the requirement that you have at least a minimal proficiency in DHTML which can be difficult if you're just getting started and it's completely new... -- Michael Harris \| Hello, \| \| I have a quick question about WSH. Now that IE5 supports \| HTML application files (ie, .HTA files), why do we need \| WSH anymore? HTML apps can do all the same things \| as WSH scripts plus one gets to use DHTML for writing \| user interface code and can generate HTML documents \| on the fly for reports. I'm just kind of curious why Microsoft \| has now released two very similar technologies....... \| \| Richard \| \| \|
Mon, 07 Jan 2002 03:00:00 GMT

M #4 / 5	WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files) WSH is aimed primarily at automating common tasks on Windows, running logon scripts and just general batch file replacement. As a result it has access to std I/O has a dynamic event binding mechanism etc. HTA's are basically HTML pages that run without the browser UI and within it's own security context. It's basically IE so is aimed primarily at DHTML UI. You should take a look at the runtime memory footprint of the 2 and if you want a small batch file processor then WSH is the way to go. If you want UI as the primary focus of what you're doing then HTA's would be a good bet. Andrew Quote: > Hello, > I have a quick question about WSH. Now that IE5 supports > HTML application files (ie, .HTA files), why do we need > WSH anymore? HTML apps can do all the same things > as WSH scripts plus one gets to use DHTML for writing > user interface code and can generate HTML documents > on the fly for reports. I'm just kind of curious why Microsoft > has now released two very similar technologies....... > Richard
Mon, 07 Jan 2002 03:00:00 GMT

Ian Morris #5 / 5	WSH scripts vs HTML Applications (.HTA files) WSH is especialy good for when you don't want a UI. Like scheduled tasks. WSH is also very cool for using with SQL Server and xp_commandshell. You can have a stored procedure that calls a script to do all sorts of things. Regards, Ian WSH FAQ http://wsh.glazier.co.nz Quote: > WSH enables you to write scripts that perform functions that you used to use > bat files for. The advantage of VBScript, or JScript, is that you can do > allot more, including control applications. WSH is really a mechanism of > invoking a script, and a set of objects that enable you to manipulate the > file system. > My scripts are primarily command line driven, and do things like configure > systems. I would not want to do this from an HTML front end, it is more > than I need. > In reality HTML and WSH provide two ways to invoke scripts and so they are > not the same, but the scripting languages that they can invoke are the same. > Therefore there is no duplication in Microsoft's effort. > Chris Lowde > > Hello, > > I have a quick question about WSH. Now that IE5 supports > > HTML application files (ie, .HTA files), why do we need > > WSH anymore? HTML apps can do all the same things > > as WSH scripts plus one gets to use DHTML for writing > > user interface code and can generate HTML documents > > on the fly for reports. I'm just kind of curious why Microsoft > > has now released two very similar technologies....... > > Richard
Tue, 08 Jan 2002 03:00:00 GMT

Page 1 of 1

[ 5 post ]