Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Very Cool Javascript Effects Library
moofx.mad4milk.net — It's easy to use, fast, cross-browser, standards compliant, provides controls to modify Height, Width, and Opacity with builtin checks that won't let a user break the effect with multiple crazy clicks.
tpimental- 1487 diggs
- digg it
- echimu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Dam it it really cool :) I can use it my application too
- rtphokie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0eye candy effects. Nothing really useful here. No digg.
- billizm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1eye candy effects are what help make modern apps apealing. ie: digg.com - when a user diggs a story, notice the fading effect? They didn't have to use eye candy javascript, but its cool.
+digg - dvd14, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Niiice. Dugg.
- tpimental, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I thought it was cool and just wanted it bookmarked for future reference... never expected it to get to the homepage ;)
- ebenthurston, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2cool. dugg. rtphokie is a donkey.
- lostboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0this is an excellent lightweight effects library which I myself will use. definate +digg
- Blizaine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0nice.... dugg
- outerspaceapple, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0i was able to break it.
- andyd273, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0awesome... I'm going to put these to work
dugg - jkearney, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0omglollers
- Kindred420, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0very cool,dugg
- kanenas.net, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I am really going to use it !!!
- rhyno2000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Very cool... when used judiciously.
WebKiddies, your internet license will be taken away if you use 3 or more mooFX on your site.
Dugg. - freakystyley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Doesn't work in Netscape 4.x! Hehehe, just kidding :P. Suh-weeeeet, just in time too... just when I was beginning to think that prototype.js was too simple and script.aculo.us was too heavy...
- leprasmurf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"On an unrelated topic does anyone have any thoughts on whether to use an ActiveX applet or a Java applet on a webpage? (other than just "microsoft sucks")
posted by spirion (1) at 11:33 AM 10/27/05"
First and main thought: ActiveX applets are useful and very powerful, however they are not very good on compatibility; they don't work in any browser save IE. Java applets are highly compatibile and can be just as powerful. - 6dust, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Java applets are highly compatible..."
Depends on the applet. I've had a lot of trouble in my company with different JVM versions. Most people with Microsoft's VM have no problems, but with Sun's it all depends on what version number they have installed. Plus, if it's used on a secure site, the users have to login to the application w/ their browsers and again with the applet. Damn you Sun!
Personally, I say go with Flash and server side remoting/web services. Less for the client to have to download, wide compatibility, less code than AJAX. Of course, I'm sure to be flamed for this opinion too... :) - Dan?!, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1A little ironic the page has JavaScript errors.
- Famouspunk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Nice thing,but what can it be used for? I mean what's the purpose?
- mcspectrum, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll be sticking with scriptaculous, still cool tho.
- sc0re, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"A little ironic the page has JavaScript errors."
LOL, yeah, I noticed that too. Still Dugg it though. It's time to freshen up a couple of sites and it's just what I was looking for. - brian2k1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I like Flash over Java/ActiveX or AJAX but the price to enter with the supported remoting is high. And there is still no way to protect the code since the entire file is downloaded and placed on the client before being executed.
- donpdonp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1check out openrico.org
- dave_colorado, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"On an unrelated topic does anyone have any thoughts on whether to use an ActiveX applet or a Java applet on a webpage? (other than just "microsoft sucks")
posted by spirion (1) at 11:33 AM 10/27/05"
personally, i'd avoid both if you can. if you absolutely must, make minimal use of activeX/java/flash. - senzafine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0definitely cool. i'm using scriptaculous but this seems like a great implementation of prototype.js.
+dugg - perchef, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0just awesome...
+dugg - standsolid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0sweet, much better than script.aculo.us imho.
Very light, easy to extend.
+digg - olivejuice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0wow! makes me want to start working on my site.
++digg - adiaga, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0cool, I probably use it soon
---
http://www.bluelightsoft.com - abrudtkuhl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've used this before. It's very nice.
- Famouspunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"I've used this before. It's very nice."
What did you use it for if I may ask? or is just something to have for fun and play around with? - kewldude606, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm using it now to display stats on my clan's roster. You click the name and fragrate, etc comes up. Unfortunately, everything is fully open when the page loads and I can't figure out a way to make them start closed including placing an onLoad event in the tag.
- ryanguill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Was just about to submit this. Does anyone else agree that digg's search sucks?
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by