Lightbox V2.0

at 06:20 on 31 March 2006, Jack wrote:

Nice

My only complaint is that you have to hover over the image to see the navigation buttons. Might confuse less experienced users.

great work non-the-less.

at 08:18 on 31 March 2006, Low wrote:

The good things about the first version of Lightbox was that it was *light*. Now prototype AND scriptaculous are mandatory. And for what? Fancy transitions? Meh. Who needs 'em? They only slow things down.

Nope, I prefer the simple, old version.

at 16:23 on 31 March 2006, Ed wrote:

Yes those transitions are nice. But a little more than neccessary. Yeah I like the old a bit better. Granted I like the image group addition that's nice.

at 04:12 on 01 April 2006, David B. wrote:

hmmm. way to support someone who gives unto the community for free... i think i'll go spend a few days creating something that everyone can one day complain about for free...

if you dont like it, then dont use it, but come on ... complaining about it is just plain disrespectful, being that he has offered this up and given of his time for free.

i guess you know you have 'arrived' when people praise and complain about your stuff at the same time.

at 12:42 on 01 April 2006, schnuck wrote:

no, David B., 'criticism' is an essential part of what is called 'democracy'. and putting something online (for the public) cries for 'criticism' (positive or negative). if you consider any sort of 'criticism' as an offense, then, consequently, i would prefer to NEVER do business with you.

p.s. something for 'free' does not automatically 'free' its own right of being poor or great.

at 14:58 on 01 April 2006, andrew wrote:

Yah, david b., i think the new version is great, but if people want to complain about it they can, there's nothing wrong with that. Your talking about not discussing a product becasue its free? How else would the author of this get feedback? Thats why you post your design stuff in a critique section. Your way too oversensitive, get a life.

at 18:55 on 01 April 2006, David B. wrote:

@andrew. real mature response, "Your way too oversensitive, get a life. get a life"? i was actually feeling you until i read that, then your post totally losses its teeth.

@schnuck, criticism IS an important part of development, but being that the author didnt post this and any 'feedback' is not going directly to the author, then no, this is not critism but complaining. and who does it help? I do not take criticism as an offense and you are free to never do business with me ( like you planned to do that anyway) if you are going to be hypocritical of my response, just as much as you have the right to complain/ criticise, i have the right to rebuff it. no?

Since when does simply publishing some cry for criticism? thats a new one to me. you all need to read Santas article on constructive critique then come back here and argue the point.

at 19:13 on 01 April 2006, Ed wrote:

I think you're missing the point David B. If you post something in the public news it's going to get a response. How are you so sure the author won't get these responses? I'm sure he wants to know what everyone thinks of it.

Just because it's free doesn't mean people can't say anything negative. It's a catch22 and isn't right. If someone post a product that is for sale. People yell at the person and say "boo spam!", and that's fine even if the product is useful. But if someone post a free product and something negative is said.. it's "it's free don't say anything negative". I'm missing something here? It's comments like this that help people who don't know what the program is make a choice. Having both postive and negative comments allow people to choose whether the program is what they need. Otherwise it's just a bias. I often look for postive and negative reviews for anything that I download. It helps in the long run.

Beside I did follow the critique gu

at 19:15 on 01 April 2006, Ed wrote:

got cut off. But I did follow the critique guidelines and so did Jack.

at 23:30 on 01 April 2006, David B. wrote:

point taken ED, at least your rebuttle was more mature than others. i may have overstepped here. my apologies

at 16:01 on 02 April 2006, schnuck wrote:

David B., i don't exactly understand why you label my post as "immature". all i have said is a) criticism is always fine (positive or negative) and b) even a "free" product is still (& always should be) debatable.

i might have exaggerated with "cries for criticism" - sorry for that, but i thought it is obvious that by publishing something that the very same will be 100% exposed to some sort of reaction. and believe there's the point of publishing: getting reaction(s) that is. i didn't expect that is new for you.

when i said "never do business with you" i actually didn't mean it literally.

at 19:04 on 02 April 2006, David B. wrote:

no, no, no i was calling andrews comment immature, i was just disagreeing with you.

at 22:09 on 02 April 2006, Low wrote:

Let me just elaborate a bit. I really do respect Lokesh' work. Version 2.0 is coded much, much better than version 1. I'm not complaining about V2.0, but - like schnuck said - trying to question some of the 'improvements' made.

Then again, David B. is right to say this criticism is not directed to Lokesh himself. But his site was full of "wow this is great" reactions, that I hesitated to mention it there. Then I passed through here, and just entered what I wanted to say earlier.

And finally, I do use V2.0 on my blog, but I stripped out the transitions myself. So everyone's happy. :)

at 11:41 on 18 June 2008, zeka oyunları wrote:

-Thanks for this good blog text.3

...

at 08:36 on 19 June 2008, bedava oyunlar wrote:

very nice, thanks,2,3

at 12:23 on 19 June 2008, 2 kişilik oyunlar wrote:

€very goods,

at 11:11 on 23 June 2008, oyun wrote:

Thanks, for this good blog tex.

,,

at 12:38 on 26 June 2008, oyunlar wrote:

nice, -very goods!......ŞYL,

at 08:44 on 30 June 2008, oyunlar wrote:

_thanks_fg

at 08:20 on 03 July 2008, komik oyunlar wrote:

nice very muchjöjöjöjö

Add a comment:

Keep the comment relevant, constructive and be polite.
A valid email address or URL to your site must be provided, or the comment might get deleted. Content seemed inappropriate or offensive may be edited and/or deleted. Avoid explicit language and words such as "sucks" and "ripoff". For more in-depth discussions use our forum. Email addresses are never displayed. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted - no need to use <p> or <br/>. Quotes & apostrophes are automatically converted to smart punctuation. Be careful when copying and pasting portions of entries or other comments. The following inline HTML elements may be used: <strong><em><pre><q><blockquote><code>. All other code will get removed before posting. Don't forget to close your tags.