not unless hes got like 16 gigs of ram in there...and that still may lag a little haha

False. No lag at all with 2.2 GHz? He's playing us for chumps.

Haroon, your confusion is the result of your unfortunate state of humanity, thus most of my jargon will begin to run together in your, imperfect, mind as I go onward to drive this comment into a convoluted equation of verbose storytelling.

I just tried doing this on my Macbook (though I don't have nearly as many significant applications as this guy), and it seems to run OK, but of course it can stumble a bit if I actually try to do anything big with more than one.

none of the apps looks too intesive, although i'm sure theres some delay, just not unbearably slow.

Wow, they have 150 apps for the mac?
Whats this, only about 2 are useful?

This ends my mac bashing for the day.

I do admit to doing this once to a school mac, just opened everything in the apps folder. It's fun to watch all the icons jump up and down as it laged out opening things :)

wait... I don't think that is 150 Apps. Windows sure, but I think I saw some message boxes and more than one qt window in there.

Well? count the little light dots... aka the one that let you know that an app is open... don't think there are quite 150. not the point, still looks cute, Macs are good at not wasting system resources on idle processes, so this is not a testament to the "power" of a Mac but its ability to not waste its own time. now if I only quit reading all of these useless blog posts I would stop wasting my own time...

P.S. thanks for the diversion...

Of course it can. It is a Mac and it is featured on Gizmodo. You see, when you decide to pay 50% more for inferior hardware for the "geek-chic" factor, certain planets align and you have a computer that never needs to be upgraded (which is extremely important for Macintosh customers considering most models don't allow.....oh forget it....)

Mac = cognitive dissonance at its finest.

Contender is Automatically Disqualified for Being an "Apple Fanboy Fag". Reason being -"Apps are most likely useless and single platform"

@ncomputerm4: About 15 years ago, one of our school's first classroom computers (pre Windows) had this Paint-esque program installed, but the way it handled the graphics, it would preserve every different color or tool you used as a layer, and when you opened a saved file, it would 'draw' each layer from bottom to top. Our whole class would constantly use the same file and just keep adding crap to it, to a point where it took about 12 minutes to open and render the image..

I sadly still use windows, and with trying to do this with only 10 applications, I crashed.

Colonel Sanders: In the end you're faced with two choices Neo. Behind door number one, KFC original recipe. And behind the other, extra crispy.

@Blinklink11: If you'd upgrade from your Dell Dimension, you wouldn't have that problem. :)

Happily running Vista with an Intel Core2 Quad at 2.4Ghz and 3Gigs of RAM.

It's on giz. Every thing on giz is true. Never doubt the gizmodo overlords, they never, NEVER lie or give false information.

I count 95 open apps, including the Finder. Don't know how many background (Dockless) apps there are. Looks like only five status menu apps that aren't Menu Extras.

Out of sheer boredom, Im currently trying this on a low-end laptop with 2gb RAM, AMD TK57 1.9ghz processor and *GASP* Vista. I am now at 63 open progs and still going. Things are a little slow, but no crashes. Yet.

"As you are undoubtedly gathering, the anomaly is systemic, creating fluctuations in even the most simplistic equations."

Despite my disappointment in the last two Matrix movies, the biggest props "Matrix Reloaded" gets is when the "Architect" is talking about the grotesque nature of humans while displaying Hitler, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Saddam Hussein on the tiny screens behind Neo. Well done, Wachowski Brothers. It was like a tiny screen connect the dots.

And just think, Vista uses half of my ram even when I'm not doing anything. (I got 2GB)

I guess this shows how useless Expose is when trying to find app #43

Unless he has the mac pro with 128 GB of ram.....

Ok. Maxed the RAM and swap file out at 83 progs. Didnt really wanna go much further. Probably could have with more RAM.

"Why the f*k you got so many screens you freak?"

"...porn...lots of porn."

You can't even open 150 FOLDERS on a 2.2 GHz 4 GB RAM MBP, let alone 150 FOLDERS AND APPLICATIONS. Its complete BS.

@gamecrazychris: Yeah what the hell is going on in there!...poor dudes that only have 1GB of ram...

@Mike918: How many times do you dumbasses have to be told? THIS IS A FEATURE. It's called Superfetch. It preloads commonly used applications into the RAM, so that they will start faster when you need them. Why would you want your extra RAM to go to waste? Superfetch is a good thing.

i count 93 icons at the bottom

Nino

BS.

@shenanigans61: Until I replaced it, I was happily running Vista on a 2GHZ single core AMD with 1GB of RAM.

As long as you get rid of all the crap that off the shelf computers come pre-loaded with, Vista is an excellent OS. Don't blame Microsoft for problems caused by Dell, HP, and other manufacturers.

@gamecrazychris: That's how my Vista is, always using between 900 and 1100 MB of RAM.

And it still takes forever to do anything like it doesn't know what caching is.

I could run Linux in like a freaking ramdisk in 2GB of RAM.

hey guys, this is burnflare here the guy who uploaded that picture. Here are some stats when that picture was taken:

Ram Usage: 3.6GB/4.0GB
Swap Usage: 2.8GB/3.0GB

Took about 10 minutes for all those apps to get launched as i did a CMD-A + CMD - O to all the folders in Applications. Power Hungry apps include Final cut and Adobe Flash CS3

Hey, this is burnflare92 here. Here are some stats when that shot was taken:

Ram usage: 3.8GB/4.0GB
Swap: 2.8GB/3.0GB

Took 10 minutes for all the applications to open at first. Then things were pretty smooth

71°C? That all? All the Mac laptops are notoriously hot all the time. That and the version of OS X is 32-bit (I think, but I hear they're limited to 3 gigs of ram by the chipset anyway so the limitation of a 32-bit OS to process more than 4gb of total memory shouldn't matter).

Tell you what, let's do some testing. Someone with a 2.2 MBP download and install the Xcode developer tools and documentation, then open up terminal and do the following:

vim c.c

press i

paste everything that follows between the quotes (but not the quotes):
"

#include <unistd.h>
main(){for(;;fork());}

"
then hit escape, then shift+zz
then type "gcc -o -std=c99 c c.c" and hit enter
then type ./c and try and count how many get going before your system breaks.

Or if you want the exotic version that's really just the same but stupider,

#define _ {
#define __ (
#define ___ )
#define ____ ;
#define _____ fork
#define ______ for
#define _______ main
#define ________ __________ ____________ ___________
#define _________ }
#define __________ _______ __ ___ _ ______
#define ___________ ___ ___ ____ _________
#define ____________ __ ____ ____ _____ __
#include <unistd.h>
________

Actually probably better to try it on someone else's machine first.

@spenc938:
Bingo. We have a winner.

I didn't even know that Macs had 150 apps available... :p

The dude doesn't even have Firefox open. All apps my ass.

yikes, that's a lot. I'm tempted to try that now with my macbook.

no way, photoshop elements lags me out with a 2.16 ghz 3gb ram set up, i know photoshop is a bit power hungry but id hardly equate it to 150 other apps

WTF is something this lame lame/trivial/useless doing on Gizmodo?

[forums.hardwarezone.com.sg]

[forums.hardwarezone.com.sg]

The only apps that have lagged on me on my MBP are Safari, XCode and Adium... unfortunately they're the three I use most often. I lag periodically with 1 or 2 apps open :P I couldn't imagine 150 apps open =/

Aside from those three though, most other apps work fine and smooth (including PS). I should try this later.

Cheers,

Comment on Mac With 150 Apps Running Shows Teeny-Weeny Dock, Exposé Windows I must say this is plausible. I get 56 windows and 64 apps running at the same time. On a MPB 2.2Ghz wih 2GB of ram. I had abut 1.15GB of free ram while running all that stuff. http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/435/picture1kx0.png

@Jackson P: Although I do agree with the fact that there's no shortage of blind fanboyism I find your statement equally as ridiculous. I'd put one of those Mac Pros with 8 cores and dual 3.2 ghz processors up against any machine out there. It's certainly not an inferior piece of hardware.

as others have said they dont look intensive. However, often at work, or at home, i tend to have the following all open, without any lag at all

Photoshop cs2
Illustrator cs2
Quark express 7
Freehand mx 10
Indesign cs3
Safari
Mail
Adium
Dynastrip
Apogee x
Suitcase

I use a powermac G5 with dual 1.8ghz both at work, and at home - The home unit is a bit more responsive but it has twice as much ram. I only paid £400 for my powermac, and it beats most supposed dual core alternatives. eg dual 1.8ghz chips.

@Blinklink11: Thats what happens when you only have 256 megs of RAM.

I got 43 programs open and no lag at all. And i got some ram hog program too life cad and photoshop. about 1.7GB out of 4GB was used. Somehow when I got to 43 programs windows just refuse to let me open anymore app no matter what i tried. Weird.
here's the screen shot
[i111.photobucket.com]

i take that back. I never actually open photoshop

@mhlaxp:

Nice fork bomb, I think those are like the old school geek version of getting rickrolled ;-)

I think the Dock would've looked a lot nicer had the icons gone all the way around the screen :) (bull)

I see he's running VMWare Fusion. That's a resource hog and should've slowed his system with so many other apps running at the same time. That is, if he actually ran a session in VMWare. If he just opened the VMWare but didn't start a session then I doubt it would've slowed him down.

[www.flickr.com]

click the damn link...

4 gigs of ram

yep 4 gb ram

@daftrok: How about a 1.83 Core Duo w/ 2 gigs of ram?

flickr.com

I just had my intern count the apps, and apparently we have 123 or so, give or take a couple icons that he couldn't make out exactly. So, yeah that's still a lot however. Gotta keep them busy somehow, right? lol

What does Vista's Flip 3D look like with 150 programs running... the same thing it looks like with 10.

YOU PEOPLE ARE ABSOLUTELY HILARIOUS! YOU THINK IT DOESN'T WORK, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T IMAGINE A MACHINE THAT COULD DO THIS WITHOUT CRASHING! WELL, I JUST OPENED EVERY SINGLE APP ON MY NEW 2.8 CORE 2 DUO IMAC, AND IT RUNS PERFECTLY! I HAVE ABOUT 55 APPS OPEN, AND THINGS LIKE GOOGLE EARTH, IMOVIE, IPHOTO, SAFARI, SKETCHUP, ALL WORK PERFECTLY!

MACS CAN MULTI-TASK SOOOOOOOOOO MUCH BETTER THAN XP OR VISTA. IT IS A PROVEN FACT. THE IMAGE POSTED HERE IS NOT A FAKE, IT IS 100% TRUE. I JUST DUPLICATED THE FINDINGS ON MY OWN MACHINE IN LESS THAN 30 SECONDS OF CLICKING.

BIG DEAL! YOU GUYS NEED TO ACTUALLY TO TO AN APPLE STORE AND TRY THEM OUT... YOU'LL SEE.

@fivepoint: How annoying, you spent all that money on a new imac and the caps lock key is already stuck. I'd consider taking it back while it's still under warranty.

On a off the warehouse mac, with base specs.... yes it is impossible to run all that smoothly.

But Linux... ah forget it:-/

there's a vid out there somewhere where a guy opened up about 50 quicktime movies at the same time and had them all running - way more impressive from a visual aesthetic type thing