Jump to content

Fogel

Members
  • Content Count

    2,820
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Fogel

  1. I am by no means a programmer. It's been so long since I've done web development I wouldn't even call myself a web "developer". That function I created should be static now that I think about it some more as there are just 3 main statuses people care about and I will be putting in a text box for explanation. But you're right, hard coding isn't the best way to solve problems. I think there is a way to solve this without an array (which I hate, especially multidimensional ones) but I'm just happy to have something that works so I can start developing the other 6 pages.
  2. You're totally missing what I'm saying. Your conditionals are if (x.className.match("status")) ....THERE ARE NO CLASSES THAT MATCH THAT, so it's never going to be true. If you don't understand that, then you really shouldn't be programming ha ha hah Well there is a derp moment! That is what I deserve for going to bed at 0430 and thinking I could function normally. Once you pointed that I had it completely revised in 5ish minutes so it is more efficient in addition to working lol. Thanks. Needed the bonk on the head. I figured that it might be something simple that I was overlooking. New code: <script> function statusChange() { x=document.getElementById('status'); if (x.className.match("box2")) { x.className="status1"; document.getElementById("status").innerHTML="<br><br>Nominal"; } else if (x.className.match("status1")) { x.className="status2"; document.getElementById("status").innerHTML="<br><br>Marginal"; } else if (x.className.match("status2")) { x.className="status3"; document.getElementById("status").innerHTML="<br><br>Problem"; } else { x.className="box2"; document.getElementById("status").innerHTML=" "; } } </script> </head> <body> <div class="box1"> Box 1 Status <div class="box2" id="status" onClick="statusChange()"> It is now a box that is clickable (no push buttons, YAY!) and cycles (YAY again).
  3. I have div box 2 assigned to id "status". Then I am trying to use the function calls to recognize that div by using elementbyid ("status") so the function knows what I'm trying to change, and I am attempting to change the properties of that div (div box 2). So if you paste that code into a W3 editor I am trying to use the push buttons to change the background color of the inside box (div box 2). So if I push 'N' the background turns Green. If I push 'M' the background turns Yellow. If I push 'P' the background turns Red. The reason I am trying to make it visual friendly is because this will be used by non-technical people in meetings so big displays with color representation means a lot ...vs static text. I could be missing what you are trying to tell me (running on 3hrs sleep for the last couple nights) but it looks like I am using the same ID call that W3 is. Are you saying that you cannot assign an ID to something that is using a style class? At some point I am want to save these status changes into a database so if someone wants to see the status of the equipment (router, switches, etc.) at a specific point in time they can make the query. That's a future problem. I gotta solve this first. Right now I can't even make the web page something the user can interact with. I am sure there are better ways of allowing the user to interact with the page with more efficient coding, so if you have any ideas please share. For example the powerpoint presentation of this tool allows the user to keep clicking the same button to cycle through the colors. There aren't multiple buttons for each status. I did that only because I couldn't figure it out how to do it the other way so I thought if I simplified it I could make it work.
  4. I took hack at the class change ("class" vs "className") so it doesn't surprise me I had that wrong, thanks for the correction on that! I cannot test it out at the moment but curiousity got the better of me so I recreated my code on W3 and it's still not working ...but I at least modified the code so it stopped giving errors. This PC is on IE 8.0 so it's possible its a browser problem or its possible that even the other PC using Firefox still won't like it. I will post the revised code below. Maybe you can spot where else I am going wrong. Ya, I'm not fond of the conditionals or the current implementation, but I can't even get an ugly inefficient loop to work currently. So I'm trying to start with ugly but it works and then move on to efficient. Though if you have an idea for a loop I can use I would be most grateful. Here is the code I am using, so you can see the whole thing rather than part of the picture I originally posted. <html> <head> <style> div.box1 { float:left; border:1px solid red; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; width:130px; height: 120px; background-color:#000000; text-align:center; font-family:arial; font-size:11px; font-weight:bold; color:#ffffff; padding:8px; z-index:-1; } div.box2 { float:left; border:1px solid white; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; width:112px; height: 88px; background-color:#313131; text-align:center; color:#ffffff; padding:8px; } div.status1 { float:left; border:1px solid white; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; width:110px; height: 100px; background-color:#00FF00; text-align:center; color:#ffffff; padding:8px; } div.status2 { float:left; border:1px solid white; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; width:110px; height: 100px; background-color:#FDFF00; text-align:center; color:#ffffff; padding:8px; } div.status3 { float:left; border:1px solid white; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto; width:110px; height: 100px; background-color:#FF0000; text-align:center; color:#ffffff; padding:8px; } </style> <script> function Nom() { x=document.getElementById('status'); if (x.className.match("status")) { x.className="status1"; } } function Yellow() { x=document.getElementById('status'); if (x.className.match("status")) { x.className="status2"; } } function Prob() { x=document.getElementById('status'); if (x.className.match("status")) { x.className="status3"; } } </script> </head> <body> <div class="box1"> Box 1 Status <div class="box2" id="status"> <button type="button" onClick="Nom()">N</button> <button type="button" onClick="Yellow()">M</button> <button type="button" onClick="Prob()">P</button> </div></div> </body> </html>
  5. I will definitely try changing case on Click. I had to retype it all for here, but div class="insideD" contains the id="status". I will edit the post so it doesn't confuse anyone else that may want to comment. That function I manipulated from the function I found at W3 Schools (the lightbulb function). I'm not exactly sure why it has the "Else" to be honest as I cannot see how it would enter the else statement either, but it does because their code can cycle between the same two images. And this is also why I am stuck ...because I cannot figure out how it will cycle through two states ...let alone 3 or more. Really appreciate the early comments and look forward to your reply when you have a bit more time, thanks!
  6. So I find myself in an odd position. I was tasked with an assignment that I could have done in Open Office (or Office Libre), which I absolutely hate soo I decided to make a web based solution. Problem is that its been YEARS since I've done any web programming and I'm cramming PHP, JavaScript, and HTML/CSS all in at once. I'm currently stuck on this problem. I am trying to get a solution where the user can either click something (picture, button, whatever works) either once or multiple times and there is a visual indicator the status of said item changed. I don't need this exact solution but for example, it could be the user pushing a button and a (div box) changes color from gray to green. If the user pushes the same button (or a different button) it changes it from green to yellow, and so on to red and back to default. I cannot figure out the solution. So wondering if someone here can help me out. Example code so far: <script> function Nom() { x=document.getElementById('status') if (x.class.match ("insideD")) { x.class="insideN"; } else { x.class="insideM"; } function Marg() { x=document.getElementById("status"); x.style.background-color="#FDFF00"; } </script> Below is the function call: <div class="insideD" id="status"> <button type="button" onclick="Nom()">Nominal</button> </div> So above are the two main things I have tried. The first option I was trying to replace the CLASS ID of the div object (insideD) with a different div. The different div (insideN) has a different back-ground color. This doesn't work. The second way is I was trying to force a background color change for that div. This also doesn't work The very first method I tried was having the user click an image and it would keep rolling over to a different image with each mouse click and each image would indicate the status. This works in the sense it changes the image one time but continuous clicking does nothing. There is no cycling of images. This method would probably be too time consuming anyways since I would probably need hundreds of images by the time I finished this project. Though if its the only way, it's the only way. I'm sure there is a way to get the first method working but either my syntax sucks or I'm missing a basic element to make it work. The other thing driving me nuts is that any other code within that div (over arching div containing smaller divs) no longer work. If I close out the div before the next set of code that follow on code works, but if I don't close it out all subsequent code no longer works, buttons included (won't even depress). Extra Information: Right now it is a div box with a status color (green, yellow, red) with buttons inside of that to change the background color (or so I want but cannot figure out). This status div box is inside another div box which acts as a border and label. And these div boxes are inside a main page div box. If anyone has a possible solution please let me know. If there is a better, cleaner solution to what I'm trying to accomplish (user can modify something that gives them visual status of at least 3 different options) than how I'm currently trying to tackle I am open to ideas. These are simply ideas that randomly that came to me. As long as its functional I really don't care, tbh.
  7. AZNguyen provided some good reasons. If you just watch the show, and not read the book, there isn't enough good reasons for it to make sense. Unpredictable is good but it still has to make sense. Offing someone just to surprise someone isn't good writing. Doing while laying clues the whole time before it happens and STILL surprising someone, is good writing. Found this quote from him regarding the scene. EW: What sort of reactions have you received from readers over the years about the scene? Extreme. Both positive and negative. That was the hardest scene I've ever had to write. It's two-thirds of the way through the book, but I skipped over it when I came to it. So the entire book was done and there was still that one chapter left. Then I wrote it. It was like murdering two of your children. I try to make the readers feel they've lived the events of the book. Just as you grieve if a friend is killed, you should grieve if a fictional character is killed. You should care. If somebody dies and you just go get more popcorn, it's a superficial experience isn't it? In the interview he says he simply does it just to surprise everyone, which to be honest is kind of a lame reply. The Red Wedding definitely surprised me. The other events had plenty of advance warning. Now that I think about it some more I knew something bad was going to happen when AZNguyen's point # 2 happened. That really didn't set well with me either and the show definitely has a bad karma is paid back feel to it. Interview Now that is some good insight, thanks for sharing! It definitely makes more sense. The show definitely leaves most of that out. The perspective you get from the show is that the whole reason is Point #3. Still enjoying the show but that scene really didn't make any sense to me until you wrote this reply. I probably will have to pick up the books at some point if I'm missing so much detail that is behind these big scenes. Also saw The Machinist Great movie! Christian Bale is so skinny in this movie its crazy. Heard he lost 70lbs for this role, looks like he lost 100lbs.
  8. Fogel

    Xbox One

    Don't think anyone from OCC wrote that petition, and if they did they probably would make a post here asking people to sign it. Also I don't think the person who wrote that petition has a good understanding of what Microsoft's plan was. Seeing the few people supporters in those comments (most were signing it as a joke) see the word Steam and believe it... wow. It's nothing like Steam. The original design limited sharing up to 10 "family" members. You could a trade a game to a friend/family member 1 time, that's it. Oh and by the way, if the petitioner does read these forums... Microsoft said it might bring family sharing at a later date. That was pretty much the only good thing in that "Steam clone" system. I think you will still be able to sell back digital bought games ...but that deserves researching and would be the other nice feature. The fact Microsoft thought many of those ideas were good just proves they don't understand the console gaming market.. AT ALL. I didn't see it myself but all my friends said Microsoft spent most of the time talking about what the XBone will do with your TV and not much at all on what their system will do for the true customers - core gamers. Even the ones I talked to who were actually excited about the XBox didn't get the message that XBox said they were trying to communicate. So blame Sony all you want for taking advantage of it, but it's not Sony's fault. I called out this scenario probably a year ago. Lots of annoyed gamers right now. Gonna be hard for Microsoft to win them back. Sometimes you need to fall flat on your face so you get back up and do a better job. I'm sure the PS3 was deemed a failure to Sony - they have high expectations of themselves. Look at the PS4. It pretty much gives everything that gamers want (outside of being free) and has already won the console war before being released. Third party developers know which console to pick now. All Sony has to do is not piss them off and they can win this no prob. Nintendo has fallen on their face, Sony's fall wasn't as bad but they still fell on theirs, and now its Microsoft's turn. XBone will still do better than the Wii U, but that really won't be much of an accomplishment.
  9. Pacific Rim So dumb it's good! Wow this movie is dumb. If you grew up watching shows like Power Rangers or Voltron or whatever, this is what the movie will remind you about. Right down to the fact that even though it is a live action movie pretending to be serious it never takes itself seriously. Down to cheesey lines like "We're out of options." ..."No, we aren't! There is one more weapon!" It has the clich
  10. Fogel

    Xbox One

    IVI That reply to the petition is just flat out brilliant, I love it! What's better? The replies thinking that guy is serious and getting wound up over it. The petitioner has the same avatar as AZNguyen. Dat puddy.
  11. Fogel

    Open World RPGs

    Ya, I'm not a fan of open world games. Like Clay said, I don't ever accomplish anything in open world games. I think it is because I want to accomplish everything and see everything but I don't have the free time to make it so, or even if I did I don't want to dedicate the time to make it so. It's why I lost interest in Far Cry 1 and 2 and why I lost interest Crysis so quickly. I wouldn't ever want to purchase GTA for the PC as its the perfect console game ...rent it or borrow it for the weekend, goof around and return it. RPGs just take it to the next level because they are already huge timesinks without needing a free expansive open world to explore. It sounds cool. It sounds like the thing to do. I just have better things to do. As much as I love the original Metroid for being the ultimate sandbox game, I don't have the spare time or dedication like I did as a little kid. Even poor Dishonored is sitting on my PC untouched because as much as I love that game I get too distracted trying the same mission 20 different ways and don't progress in the game.
  12. I can't read those articles at this time but I knew Wii U would be a failure before it launched. They need to "get with the times". They are too hung up on innovation and they ran out of ideas. I played ZombieU and it's actually a great game with a good concept. The real problem with the Wii U is there are no other real games for it so people who would normally buy a Wii U but are waiting for big name titles to come like Mario Kart, Zelda, Metroid, etc. don't see anything tempting to take a chance on a Wii U. And of those who already bought the Wii U are probably in a different target audience for it to be honest. ZombieU is more for core gamers since the difficulty is higher than what most people are currently used to. There isn't much slack in that game. So that is going to be a game many probably rented instead of bought. So if there were more core games on the Wii U and more core gamers I think ZombiU would have done better. As far as the comment about Nintendo giving up on consoles completely I think that is way heavy handed. They deserve to be in the console market far more than Microsoft does. Microsoft proved it doesn't understand console gamers with its XBone system. It tried to treat the console gaming market like a PC market and the two are not even close to the same. Nintendo understands the console the market (see Wii dominating sales and its previous consoles like NES, SNES) and the gamers. They are stuck in rut thinking they cannot and will not compete for core gamers as its easier for them to compete for the average person. They really do need to get with the times. They're being that stubborn old guy set in his ways. They can become relevant again if they release hardware 3rd parties want to develop on and do what they do best ...mario, zelda and metroid. But its going to be hard to entice 3 parties when everyone knows your console lost the race before its even out. I see XBone having a similar problem enticing 3rd parties. Microsoft will play hardball so it should have some but it will fail in comparison to what Sony will get. Nintendo just needs to realize if they enter the race again they can make games for the masses as well as games that core gamers will enjoy. They have the experience and the right mindset to do right to their fan base. Maybe Wii U will be the wake up call they need. And XBone dropping in popularity should spark them up too!
  13. lol see, she is a lobo! Good bye tiger, hello Ms. Lobo!!
  14. I like very small text. Think it looks neater/cleaner. Though I do not change text size.
  15. Just came back from Europe. You would totally fit in over there. Seemed like half the cars were small hatchbacks. She is in Lobo country now, so its gotta be paw prints.
  16. My cousin has developer access so I saw and played with iOS7 in person. They included a lot of great functionality so that was good. The icons and graphical interface is just something horrible though. First thing everyone said when they saw it was, "Yuck"! People are having fun playing with it so the new features are great but it really takes time adjusting to the new flattened ultra bright colored display. And the icons are just plain butt ugly. The basic camera did gain a lot of features like being able to edit and apply filters. I do not recall seeing a timer but doesn't mean it doesn't have it. Camera+ is a great app and takes far better pictures than the current iOS6 camera app and it does have a timer feature. Not sure how you guys are getting 2hrs battery life. Seen an iPhone 5 last up to 4 days. Non-stop game play seems to drain it to a day to day in half charge.
  17. Oddly enough it took me going out of the country to catch up on American Movies and TV Shows Vikings: First because this show is f__king awesome! I don't like to cheat on bad words here on the forum but sometimes they are appropriate and this show is bad a_s. There really isn't much I do not like about the show. There isn't much history or lore on the real Vikings you can truly believe in since they didn't keep historical accounts back then and the historical accounts that are kept are from their enemies. The music, the story, the cinematography, the characters, and the acting I find to all be top notch. Very simple story but it works exactly for what it is. It doesn't use gimmicks either. If there is violence it is because it is needed at that time. Not sure how people can compare this to Game of Thrones. The two aren't even similar. Only style they share in common is being set in a time period long lost. I didn't even know this show existed. Maybe I should actually turn on my TV sometime and turn to the History channel. Highly recommended show. Game of Thrones: Great show. Chewed through Season 1 like I chewed through Vikings. It didn't excite me as much, but its engaging. So many shows/movies are afraid to show nudity now due to the negative conotation so I give credit to HBO to sticking to what they know. Though much of it does feel out of place and forced. The story is typical political nonsense so its the characters that work and make the show engaging because you either want to see someone pay for being the sniveling backstabbing scardy cat they are, or cheer someone on either because they are good at being a jerk or good at sticking to their valiant guns in an unhonorable society. Carnivale: Not sure what to make of this show just yet. I find it more weird than I find it interesting. Nice to see a good mystery show because it is quite clear the storyline is complex wrapped around a simple concept but since it is a mystery show it hasn't revealed enough for me to know if I am going to like it or not. It banks on the fact its weirdness and nudity will keep the viewer engaged before it reveals the big secret. They do a very good job on the overall feel of the show - the weirdness - as it does not feel forced. It absolutely nailed it in that respect. Still not sure on this show just yet. Django: Saw it on the airplane so horrible screen but much better than I thought it would be. Probably won't own it but a fun watch. Well I might own it. Oz the Great and Powerful: I liked this. I'm gonna find a good deal on this movie. Saw this on the plane too so I would like to see the world on a nice TV. Wasn't mind blowing fantastic but a fun watch and better than I had been anticipating. Bullet to the Head: Again better than expected, though expectations were very low. Worth watching if you can see it for free and you have the time. It's a good Stallone film. If you watched his old movies and his new movies and you like action movies than that should say it all. End of Watch: Pretty good, better than was anticipating. Good film. Good for a boring Saturday. Warrior: Good movie. I had very low expectations but even if I had good expectations from it I still would have liked it. It's going to be a niche film though as it's definitely not for everyone. It was a very predictable movie but I liked the style it used and can forgive it because of that. It did a better job than most movies do on painting flawed characters. It's not an award winner or one you recommend to everyone but I'm glad I watched it. The Hurt Locker: Was told to watch this by a few people because they thought I would be enamoured with it. It was entertaining and kept me watching despite being completely jet lagged and watching this on broadcast TV back here in the States. I missed some of it but the movie didn't engage me enough to appeal to my Movie OCD tendacies, gotta see every single second. It did a good job with the main character's character and he did a good job acting. It did a good job pointing out the reality of personality flaws. Not a fun, feel good movie though. I can see why people recommend it though, I just didn't enjoy it as much as everyone thought I would. Jack the Giant Slayer: Glad I saw this on the plane. Ok. The girl was cute and I wanted to see her on a bigger screen. Rise of the Guardians: No, just no. Some things were done ok but not for me. Hansel and Gretel: Wanted to see this movie so I watched it for free on the plane like the two movies above. The girls were hot. It could have been better but horrible direction and the plotline was almost as bad as a porno. If the director could learn from his mistakes though he could be pretty decent because I did see some promise. Many/most people will see the mistakes though. Think of all the cheesy horror films you watch, mistakes are along those lines. Cabin in the Woods: Speaking of horror movies, I almost forgot I watched this right before my trip. My horror film buff friend says this movie is the ultimate fan service for horror film fanatics. It was done very well but it really is hard for me to get over the cheesyness of horror films. This movie makes fun of it in an intelligent way while keeping the cheese factor. That is a hard feat to accomplish. How do you sell cheeze in a fun intelligent way? This movie did it. Just not my style. Wouldn't keep me from recommending it though. Man of Steel: Saw this in the theater overseas. Glad it was in English with subtitles in their language lol. Sadly it was in 3D though, but free is free so not gonna complain. Great movie! Part of me was impressed and another part saw some cheesyness. I spent too much time looking for some of things that made the old superman movies so great. Overall it is a very good movie that I think many people will love. I didn't love it as much as I thought I would. My cousin thought it was best movie of the year. I really wanted to agree with him and I told him I did (he did get us in for free) but I can't say that I did. I want to see it again without the 3D. Perhaps I will go in with a fresh mind and not try to compare it to the movies that came before it. I spent a lot of time trying to remember if that is how Superman's character really develops because some things that happen in the beginning just don't make any logical sense. The end was a bit over the top, but I really enjoyed the middle part of the movie. So that is why I am confused on this movie. If the beginning made sense to me, as in if it's true to the comics (don't know) than I would be ok with the ending of the movie being over the top.
  18. This girl that used to work here drives a '67 Chevelle. Well she stopped when she got pregnant and needed a "family car". I offered to buy it but she said NO WAY!
  19. That is awesome man! I don't watch TV that often, so it seems like I keep seeing this commercial when I do... "When you love what you do you, you never have to work a day in your life." Let me know if that's true or not so I can be jealous if it is. That could get dangerous quick He already has 10 kids, so I think he's done plenty of dangerous stuff in his free time. Exactly why he needs time by himself. But speaking of the family time and things popping out ... inb4 Onion Ok, I'm calling it right now... that sounds worthy of a new avatar!
  20. Fogel

    Xbox One

    Well your 360 controller will still work with the PC. Not like you need the newest controller for the PC. They didn't add any buttons, so still the same from that perspective. Not too worried about the outdated headset plug. I always used the cheap one that came with the system. Makes me glad I didn't purchase any of those overpriced turtle beach things though.
  21. Fogel

    PlayStation 4 (PS4)

    For some dumb reason I thought the URL was contradicting something. Thanks for the clarification. I see what I misread now. Definitely nice for all the PS Vita owners out there.
  22. I think I played the original Wolfenstein as a kid on a neighbor's older computer, but outside of that I can't say I ever played Wolfenstein. These screenshots are making me wonder if I should have considered RtCW more. Not sure if RtCW looked anything like these screenshots but wow. Pretty sweet.
  23. Fogel

    PlayStation 4 (PS4)

    I can't read the actual article here, blocked, but I'm not liking the wording in the URL. Is that just poor wording? "sony-requiring-ps-vita-remote-play-for-all-playstation-4-games/"
  24. Fogel

    Xbox One

    What pictures were you looking at? The XB1 controller is the same overall size as the 360 controller, only with a smaller battery compartment, better D-pad, stickier thumb sticks and a smoother texture. The PS4 remote is more of the same uncomfortable controller with a mini touch pad. Looks to me like MS improved on the 360 controller while Sony if anything side-graded theirs. Picture x2 Not one that showed them side by side. That definitely changed my opinion of it - thanks for sharing! I was going by stand alone pictures. For some reason when I saw the pictures of it by itself it looked bigger and dorkier. I like how they got rid of that battery pack hump - that did always annoy me a bit. Nice improvement there. I still can't say it changed my view on the XBone but I feel better about the controller so if something does come along to change that feeling than that is one less thing that would hold me back on purchasing. @bp Ya I can understand that. The fact I could buy a year on Amazon for $30 made me tolerate the annual fee. Speaking of slow clunky user interface. They better make typing messages on this new system faster. That frustrates the living piss out of me when ever I used my xbox. Nothing made me miss mouse and keyboard more than trying to type a PM on xbox live.
  25. Star Trek It could have been a great movie ...outside of the last 30 minutes, which just came off as extremely cheesy and predictable. I think the rest of the movie made up for it though. I told my friend he was being too hard on it. Despite that whole sequence at the end that didn't really need to happen it was still a really good movie.
×
×
  • Create New...