Search results for query: *

Trying to source an identical drive...hopefully replacing the Micro USB controller will fix the problem. Thanks for everyone's help!

Thanks guys. Was quoted AUD$990 to fix it, so I'll have to buy another drive and attempt a transplant. I'll change over the micro USB interface first to see if that works, if it doesn't, then I have no choice other than performing the surgery.

Hi guys, A friend asked me to take a look at her portable WD HDD which isn't working. Apparently it had been working intermittently over the last couple of months, until recently stopped working altogether. The power LED comes on, but there is no life. The drive does not power up- i.e it...

DTracey, Flashed the BIOS...installing XP as we speak. Star for you. Was a mission to get XP installed, but is now done! Thanks to everyone that helped. Now I have the issue of getting all the drivers I need...VGA, NIC, etc...but that is the easy part! Cheers guys.

Yep, all removed. Even so, I've installed Windows over Linux many a time (including laptops). When I switch it on, if it boots off HDD I get an invalid system disk error. So the MBR is gone. I hoping it's the BIOS version. That will be my last ditch attempt!

DTracey, that is the one thing I haven't attempted yet...flashing the BIOS. Thanks, I'll have a look at it. Linney, there is currently no OS on the laptop. The drive has been formatted, and I have been attempting a clean install.

xwb: Used cfdisk (linux) to change the partition signature to NTFS, then used ntfsprogs to make a NTFS filesystem on it. Still no luck. BadBigBen: That was one of the first things I tried. I'm giving up & putting Vista on it. The Vista disk boots properly and starts the install. Still...

I have a Compaq Presario C774TU. It came with Vista Basic Home on it, and I wiped it and have had Arch Linux on it for the past year. I'm now giving the laptop to my bother who wants XP on it. I have a licensed copy of XP SP3 and decided to install... However it would go to a black screen...

Well I ended up using an Ajax call to a PHP template and set the <img> properties in the PHP template (which simulates a download). On success I then display the image. This seems to work well, and the call is only made on the first time each image is rolled over. Overkill, but it works well.

Feherke, the onload function works well. I'll just have to do some testing on a production server and see how it goes. If it doesn't work well I'll just implement my Ajax solution.

Cool, will give it a try!

Feherke, with PHP I output a whole pile of thumbnail images, somewhere around the 32 images mark. I have another div with an <img> as a placeholder. When I click on a thumbnail image, I display the fullsize version of the thumbnail. The issue here is that simply changing the src attribute of...

Thanks! Will give it a try

BillyRay...I understand your solution is a solution, but not a viable one. I don't think it is smart to pre-cache 30+ images that are potentially 300KB each, which would mean the page load = 8.7MB feherke, thanks dude. Will give this a go!

Hi, I have some thumbnails, which when clicked I would like to display the full-size version of the image in another container. To give some perspective, the thumbnails are all 70x70 and are around 4KB in size. The full size versions are around 100 to 300KB. My first attempt at this was to...

OK...this is simple, but I can't get this working. I click on a button and change an image's src, i.e. <script type="text/javascript"> function showImage(imageName) { var default_img = getElementById('defaultImage'); tmp_img = new Image(); tmp_img.src = imageName...

Sounds good, but that was what I was trying to avoid. I only want to load the 320x320 image when clicked (as the page is quite dynamic with a lot of content). Thanks anyway

Hi, I have two identical sets of images: the first set is 80x80 pixels, the second set is 320x320 pixels. What I want to do is display a thumbnail image (80x80), then when you click on the thumbnail, it loads the large image (320x320) in another container on the page. If I use the 320x320...

Because it is inside a form

I should have been more specific... minified as in white space removed, shortened variable names, etc. It is the shortening of variable names that is what I believe will create the problems.