- nanoset.net
- demonoid
- torrents.ru
- zamunda.net
- rarbg.com
- p2pbg.com
- data.bg
- bitme.org
http://www.torproject.org/
http://www.torproject.org/
Thickbox doesnt work with the new versions of jquery. The max version I found that it works it was 1.2.6.
List of alternatives
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/687132/a-modelbox-for-jquery-1-3-2
|
1
|
I am using jQuery 1.3.2 and I was wondering if anyone knew of a modelbox/lightbox that would work with that. I’ve found a bunch of jQuery powered lightboxes, but most of them use way older versions of jQuery.
I am going to use it to display an html form so it need it to support more than just images. Thanks — I ended up going with colorbox because it’s really pretty good. The only downside I can see is that if doesn’t recenter after you re-size the browser window, but I can live without that.
|
|||
|
|
|
|
ColorBox is one that I found recently and seems similar in capability to Thickbox. Their main page indicates it was built against jQuery 1.3.
The particular features that were important to me were:
|
||
|
|
|
|
I don’t think there’s anything specifically for 1.3.2 as it is pretty recent. Even though Thickbox is ancient, it still works well and lets you show anything you want in the modal. Also check out jqModal for a little newer plugin with some features Thickbox lacks like callbacks. I’ve used both of these with >1.3 jQuery versions with no problems and they are very good. |
||
|
|
|
|
We’ve used both SimpleModal and FancyBox and had good results. |
||
|
|
|
|
Just tried SimpleModal, does not work with jQuery 1.3.2. As soon as I switch back to 1.2.6, everything back to normal. Any suggestions? Thanks |
||
|
|
|
|
Slimbox 2: http://www.digitalia.be/software/slimbox2 Works perfectly for me with jQuery 1.3.2, and is as simple as original LightBox. |
http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/category/inspiration/
Как човек да не се самоубие.
Нестига, че българските търговци продават обектива с 40% оскъпяване в сранение с американските си колеги, ами и гоогле е изоставил търсачката ми за цени и не излизам в резултатите за него
2500 лв минимална цена от http://cenite.com/p/Canon%20EF%2024-70mm
Ето ви малко инфо за сравнение
$1349.00 – http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=149
Имам стационарен телефон, които от дни не е работел. Естествено вместо БТК да ми се обади и сигнализира за повредата се наложи аз да го установя със закъснение и да ги уведомя.
За да се обадя на телефон повреди трябваше да посетя ето този “сайт” www.btc.bg, който вместо да ме посрещне с най-важните телефони и информация е публикувал на първа страница реклами за различни продукти и услуги и всякаква ненужна информация за лоялни клиенти (като мен).
Отвратителната организация на сайта не помага по никакъв начин на своите потребители. За мой късмет влезнах в менюто “частен клиент” където, проверих какво ми предлага моя текущ абонамент “у дома 50“, но и там нямаше информация за телефона за повреди. Обаче мишката ми случайно мина в/у линка
“Безплатен достъп до Обслужване на клиенти, по всяко време” и там изкочи tooltip в който имаше телефон.
ГЕНИАЛНО!!! Вече набирам номера и си мисля че ще говоря с повреди, но…
музика……музика…….
Дали не са го скрили нарочно меню-то за да не може разгневени клиенти да се свързват директно със support-а им ?
Едва ли…. Както и да е, да му мислят и от http://www.magstudio.bg/, които са правили website-a на БТК.
Нека проверим в сайта търсене за “повреди“. О, не! Появиха се резултати и се скриха! БТК има търсачка която крие резултатите! Възхитен съм :) Бърз поглед в полето за търсене ми показва, че търсената от мен фраза липсва. Явно доста са бързали докато са правили сайта.
Проверката продължава в google с “btk повреди” – само безполезни страници в които хората си изплакват болката към БТК.
Голямо излагане е и забравените мета тагове, с които сайта се е записал вече в търсачките
<meta name="Description" content="Description" /> <meta name="Keywords" content="keywords" />
набираш: 0800 100 – после чакаш, и натискаш 5
To install ubuntu on Dell system you need to change the default boot loader to grub2 or something else #change the root password to something that you know sudo passwd #become root su mkdir /media/ubuntu mount /dev/sda1 /media/ubuntu # check that you have mounted the right partition. ls /media/ubuntu mount -t proc none /media/ubuntu/proc mount -o bind /dev/ /media/ubuntu/dev cp /etc/resolv.conf /mediaubuntu/etc chroot /media/ubuntu /bin/bash /etc/init.d/networking restart aptitude update aptitude install grub2 upgrade-....<tab>
http://photo.net/equipment/building-a-digital-slr-system/
http://www.photography101.org/basics/how_to_choose_a_lens.html
The best article that I can find was here, here is link to another chart
And the following has been cut from this topic
But if you still have concerns about focusing accuracy, are not sure if it’s user error etc, are dubious about some of the ruler tests worth (as I am), then this method is very simple to use, requires no special equipment, and takes only a minute to do.
Very quick and easy way to check a number of aspects of your focus system repeatably and accurately using no special equipment:
Mount camera on tripod. Use remote release, or self-timer for taking the test shots. If you don’t use a tripod, I think you should consider your results invalid.
Step 1:
Display something predominantly white, with text all over it on your monitor screen. Maximising your Outlook inbox screen works well.
Ensure your camera back is parallel and centred with respect to your screen. Focus on your computer monitor screen manually. Notice that at the point of exact focus, you see a Moire pattern in the viewfinder. (Squiggly interference lines).
Take a picture.
Step 2:
Move the lens out of focus, and this time use AF to onto the screen again, and you should see the moire pattern in your viewfinder.
Take the picture.
Step 3:
Review the images.
That’s it.
Possible Problem Indicators:
If you can see the moire pattern in the viewfinder when manual focusing, but not when Autofocusing, or not in the resultant image on the CF card, that would indicate that there is some kind of focus alignment issue that might warrant further investigation. The moire is always strongest at the point of exact focus, so the AF and MF tests should appear very similar.
Instead of using Outlook for the above test, open up FVU and display one of your previous images with the FVU focus point overlay.
Align your camera at the correct distance and position, so that your in-finder focus boxes, overlay those displayed
Now when you review your images, you can also see if the focus boxes in your camera, correlate with those shown in FVU.
The reason I added this step, was that someone on this forum was concerned that their in-camera focus boxes appeared to disagree with those shown in FVU.
Quick, easy and repeatable check of your finder, sensor, and AF alignment.
What is your key that you are using:
Activation console:
I have searched in Internet for some activation removal tools like RESET 5 but I cant find any active online.
How to login in expired windows:
The conclusion is:
Use the aways the latest windows version. Turn off the windows updates to be not surprised bad.
© 2026 Ivo Bardarov
Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑