Argalius
-
Posts
2.718 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Argalius
-
-
Doesn't look too cool if you ask me...
-
They released the requirements. Really, they are nuts...
Recommended:* 3 Ghz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor
* 1 GB System RAM
* ATI X800 series, Nvidia GeForce 6800 series, or higher video card
Minimum System Requirements:
* Windows XP
* 512MB System RAM
* 2 Ghz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor
* 128MB Direct3D compatible video card
* and DirectX 9.0 compatible driver;
* 8x DVD-ROM drive
* 4.6 GB free hard disk space
* DirectX 9.0c (included)
* DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card
* Keyboard, Mouse
Supported Video Card Chipsets:
* ATI X1800 series
* ATI X1300 series
* ATI X850 series
* ATI x800 series
* ATI x700 series
* ATI x600 series
* ATI Radeon 9800 series
* ATI Radeon 9700 series
* ATI Radeon 9600 series
* ATI Radeon 9500 series
* ATI Radeon 9000 series
* NVIDIA Geforce 7800 series
* NVIDIA GeForce 6800 series
* NVIDIA GeForce FX series
-
Oh man, I wish I still had maths like that. The things I have now are just terrible.
-
I wish I knew her in person.
It's Kate Beckinsale, a british actress.
-
(0.5n+0.5)(n+2)
is the same as:
(0.5n+0.5)*n + (0.5n+0.5)*2
Then you'll get:
0.5n^2 + 0.5n + n + 1
is:
0.5n^2 + 1.5n + 1
When you put in 3:
0.5*3^2 = 4.5
1.5*3 = 4.5
+ 1
= 10
EDIT: I'm not sure where you went wrong, but I think it's because you divided up 0.5n into 0.5 and n. But it's pretty hard to do it on a PC...
-
If I can run it (which I doubt with my antique Geforce 2 MX) I'll get it for sure...
-
You I've got everything fixed and ready to go, for the lay-out that is, atleast.
-
Hey, the bug is gone.
-
Thanks guys!
-
Hey there Fluffy!
-
Hey there WFG,
For the past few days I've let my artistic side float to the surface, which resulted in hourse messing with Photoshop. Something I'm interested in is so called photo "de-touching". Instead of make a photo better you make it look more evil or something. Well I tried some of that but I need much more practice before I'll get the result that I want. But anyway, this afternoon I've worked on one and this is what I got so far:
And this is the original image:
I must say I'm most proud of the closing of the eye, eventhough it was pretty easy I think it's pretty cool.
What do you think?
-
Hmm I don't know but I don't really like them. Maybe too much text. Also I don't really like the colours you chose for the second banner, purple and green isn't my favourite.
-
I asked a question regarding sharing animations... and that was possible, but I don't think that's possible with vertex-animation is it?
-
Ok it worked, thanks. And I'll look into the solution of two different CSS sheets. But does the <!--[if IE 6]> only work when the user is using IE 6?
-
I used this code to get the rollover effect:
#home {height: 41px;
margin-left: 7px;
}
#home a.image { /* definition of the "image" class in the <a> tag */
display: block; /* a tag must be a block */
width: 142px; /* width of reactive image */
height: 41px; /* height of reactive image */
background-image: url(images/trans.gif); /* source for start image */
background-repeat: no-repeat;
}
#home a.image:hover { /* definition of the "image" class for <a> tag when hovered onto */
background-image: url(images/home.jpg); /* source for target image */
}
So that's about the same as you said.
Ok, floating the links worked. However, where FF showed me a bar above the menu I had to compensate with margin-top: -11px;, IE doesn't do that so the hover images are too high. How can I hide that part of code from IE?
And also IE positions them on the wrong spot, so how can I add CSS code that only IE will read?
-
The previous one was vertical indeed, but I managed to fix that, but now another menu has problems. And this menu is horizontal.
I deleted the display:block but that didn't matter anything. For the other solutions, I can't test them right now because the domain is down...
But for the rollover code, that works, both in FF and IE.
-
I had used that to fix my previous problem... But when I delete it everything still shows up the way it's supposed to. But it still puts them vertically.
-
I have this specified as you answered on the previous question:
li {display: inline;
}
li a {
color: #e9c109;
display: block;
}
And this specially for the menu:
#menu {height: 41px;
background: url(images/top-menu.jpg);
}
#menu li {
float: left;
display: inline;
}
#menu ul {
margin-top: -11px;
}
And this is the HTML:
<div id="menu"><ul>
<li><div id="home"><a class="image" href="x"></a></div>
</li>
<li><div id="forum"><a class="image" href="x"></a></div>
</li>
<li><div id="gallery"><a class="image" href="x"></a></div>
</li>
<li><div id="contactus"><a class="image" href="x"></a></div>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
Where the IDs home, forum, gallery and contactus are used to make the image switch when you rollover them.
-
Are you sure? Because it doesn't seem to work...
-
Ok, now I got another problem. A more common one, but I couldn't really find a solution to it.
I used "float: left;" in my CSS so my <li> is nicely placed next to eachother instead of under eachother. However, IE tends to do things differently and just places them vertically... :\
Any fix for that?
-
Your solution worked Klaas. Had to specify a bit more because it was going to the next line after every link first, but it's fixed now. Thanks.
-
Doesn't work either. I also tried to put an id infront of it so I'd get this:
.members li { ... } but that doesn't work either... :\
-
I tried that, both with li and ul, nothing happened...
This is what I had:
.li {margin: 0px;
padding: 0px;
}It didn't work.
-
Hey there,
I'm trying to make a site work in IE (I know, stupid, but necessary). So I have this site where I use <li> tags. Firefox shows them correctly, like this:
first
secondBut IE, strangly as it is, shows this:
first
secondIt just adds some sort of gap between all of the different <li> tags. I haven't specified anything so that can't be wrong. But why does IE add the white space when I haven't asked for it!! But anyway, is there a way around it?
EDIT: For second problem see post #11.
Happy Groundhog day!
in Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion
Posted
You Americans are so dumb.