record - Gizmodo

posts about #record more →
Sharp Triple Layer Solar Cell Sets New Efficiency Record
Tesla Roadster May Set New Record for Distance on A Single Charge
Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
Cogi Writes Down Your Conversations So You Don't Have To
Jet Pack Crosses 1,500-Foot Long Colorado Canyon, Breaks World Record
Audio Engineer: Metallica's Latest Album Sounds Better on Vinyl
World's Highest Lego Tower Construction on Video
Future Victim of Everest to Ride Down Mountain on a Unicycle
Ex-MS Employee Has the World's Fastest Ethanol-Based Car
Solar-Powered Plane Smashes World Record, Sort Of

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Noobs-R-Us
10/23/09

In reply to Sharp Triple Layer Solar Cell Sets New Efficiency Record
Way too expensive. #energy
Reply

Noobs-R-Us was starred Noobs-R-Us was unstarred

hoocli
10/23/09

In reply to Sharp Triple Layer Solar Cell Sets New Efficiency Record
how expensive is it though? #energy
Reply

Kaiser-Machead promoted this comment hoocli was starred hoocli was unstarred

Kaiser-Machead
10/23/09

@hoocli: First born.99. #energy
Reply

Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred

N@tedog
04/10/09

In reply to Tesla Roadster May Set New Record for Distance on A Single Charge
This post is completely wrong.

[www.reghardware.co.uk]

[www.mygreencar.eu]

[www.leftlanenews.com]

It only went 241 miles. Not 341. This is no where even close to the Solectria Sunrise's 375 miles during the 1996 American Tour de Sol.

I hate to call you out like this, Giz, but who's editing this stuff? This is a brazenly obvious and flagrant error.
Reply

N@tedog was starred N@tedog was unstarred

N@tedog
04/10/09

@N@tedog:

Record is 375 miles.

[www.megawattmotorworks.com]

[en.wikipedia.org]

[www.acterra.org]
Reply

N@tedog was starred N@tedog was unstarred

Kaiser-Machead
04/10/09

In reply to Tesla Roadster May Set New Record for Distance on A Single Charge
Man do I hate those taillights, but man do I love this car.
Reply

Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred

Dave Lindsay
04/10/09

In reply to Tesla Roadster May Set New Record for Distance on A Single Charge
Predicting remaining energy near the end of a battery's run is difficult, so the 38 miles remaining claim is dubious. On top of that, 241 + 38 = 279 miles, still a far cry from the 375 mile record. Go Gizmodo.
Reply

Dave Lindsay was starred Dave Lindsay was unstarred

pettiblay
04/10/09

@Dave Lindsay: It's a typo you stupid facebook user. 341 + 38 = 379 > 375
Reply

pettiblay was starred pettiblay was unstarred

lolgreg
04/10/09

@pettiblay: You need a juice box.
Reply

lolgreg was starred lolgreg was unstarred

macusernick
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
For all the haters out there, here is a small list of the 200 apps:

Ableton Live

Activity Monitor (duh!)

Adobe Dreamweaver

Adobe Flash

Adobe Photoshop

Adium

Calculator

Cocktail

Final Cut

Firefox

Font Book

GarageBand

Google Earth

Growl

iCal

iChat

iMovie

iSquint

iTunes

Internet Explorer

Limewire

Mail

Microsoft Powerpoint

Microsoft Word

Pacifist

Parallels

Quicktime

Real Player

Skype

Sound Studio

Soundtrack Pro

Sticky Notes

Stuffit Expander

Synergy

System Preferences

TextWrangler

Transmission

VLC

Xcode (?)
Reply

macusernick was starred macusernick was unstarred

Rabid Penguin
02/03/09

@macusernick: That must be a really small list of 200 apps because I think there are only 39.

But couldn't you just open 200 different instances of the same program? Then try having them all do the same intensive task simultaneously.
Reply

Rabid Penguin was starred Rabid Penguin was unstarred

jbrownbrugo
02/03/09

@Rabid Penguin: well if there were 200 instances of the same program then there wouldnt be 200 items in the dock. Each item in the dock is a different app
Reply

jbrownbrugo was starred jbrownbrugo was unstarred

Rabid Penguin
02/03/09

@jbrownbrugo: But "he dock can't get beyond 100 applications" anyway. I thought the point was just having the apps running, not how many icons were in the dock.
Reply

Rabid Penguin was starred Rabid Penguin was unstarred

soggy_cheerio
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
I suppose if one intrepid user wanted to end this utterly yawntastic pissing contest, one could install the entirety of the ubuntu repositories and write a script to launch them all.

Maybe if I get bored.
Reply

soggy_cheerio was starred soggy_cheerio was unstarred

CraziestGadgets.com
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
someone should make an App that keeps a count of how many Apps you have open and what the current record is.
Reply

discounteggroll
02/03/09

@CraziestGadgets.com:

wouldn't that be considered a kickback though?
Reply

discounteggroll was starred discounteggroll was unstarred

AKAuser
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
Doesn't a typical Vista machine have at least 200 background services and applications running at start-up?
Reply

AKAuser was starred AKAuser was unstarred

Rabid Penguin
02/03/09

@AKAuser: If you're running iTunes on Vista it's about 300 background services at start-up.
Reply

Rabid Penguin was starred Rabid Penguin was unstarred

Posavoie
02/03/09

@Rabid Penguin: You might say that as a joke, but iTunes kills my laptop (running Vista HP 32-bit). Even after doubling up my RAM, it slows down everything to a crawl. Damn iPod, if it wasn't for that my laptop would meet all my computing needs.

Maybe I should buy a Zune :P
Reply

Posavoie was starred Posavoie was unstarred

Rabid Penguin
02/03/09

@Posavoie: It was a joke... but I wasn't kidding ;c) That's why I don't use iTunes for my iPod. Well, that and iTunes sucks.
Reply

Rabid Penguin was starred Rabid Penguin was unstarred

discounteggroll
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
kernel panic could constitute #201
Reply

discounteggroll was starred discounteggroll was unstarred

Lokno
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
How does that set a record, there'e no standard on the footprint of each application. I could go write a stub application that does nothing. I bet I could open something like that a thousand times.

But I understand, I used to support Apple. You have look for things to do.
Reply

Lokno was starred Lokno was unstarred

Jesus Diaz
02/03/09

@Lokno: These are standard apps. Go find 201 apps and then call us back.
Reply

Jesus Diaz was starred Jesus Diaz was unstarred

Jhwk
02/03/09

@Lokno: Great points! "App" needs to be defined - and "running at the same time" needs some work too - I could open 500 word documents in 500 separate windows, but that does not count. If it like every other program, most of them are static unless they are the "active" program.

+ I didn't know apple had 200 programs... :)
Reply

Jhwk was starred Jhwk was unstarred

BeautifulAgony
02/03/09

@Jesus Diaz: Ok, but are the 200 apps that are open actually doing anything, or is it just an "opened" version of Final Cut, Photoshop, etc.

If so, then RAM and paging would pretty much do the trick, and then any currently running "foreground" app, like the video chat, would get priority and the app would essentially be dead in the water.

I would like to know if he was able to have any of those apps actively processing data, image editing, transcoding video, downloading files, de/compressing archives, etc, etc.

Having 200+ apps running is largely a feat of RAM and disk paging, but doesn't necessarily speak for the stability of the OS (though potentially might). The most telling is that it took 15 minutes to open them all, which, to me, indicates a lot of RAM and disk paging activity and overall system slowdown in terms of prioritizing memory segmentation.

As far as I know (which isn't far, I'm not a Mac user) iChat 4.0 is optimized to take advantage of dual core and video hardware acceleration, so I imagine it would perform decently despite (many) other apps loitering in the background.

I'm not saying it isn't a feat, but I do wonder what, if anything, it proves, other than the fact that some people will do nearly anything (regardless of how practical or informative) to prove the supposed superiority of a given platform. The only thing I'm inclined to call shenanigans on is that he claimed 15 minutes to open 200 apps. That would be an average of 4.5 seconds per app from click to read-state (unless he made a script that opened them all and it took 15 minutes to process, page, etc). Still seems suspect.

/shrug
Reply

BeautifulAgony was starred BeautifulAgony was unstarred

Fuji-kun
02/03/09

@BeautifulAgony: its prettty simple. open 200 windows of anything on any version of windows. it will crash freeze or something. regardless of what this aps are doing just proves how much better mac os utilices the hard/software.
Reply

Fuji-kun was starred Fuji-kun was unstarred

BeautifulAgony
02/03/09

@Fuji-kun: Perhaps you are correct. On Win XP Pro SP3 I've currently got 100 open applications as a test, with 15 being seperate processes of Google Chrome. I just don't have enough applications to test it, even with the entire CS3 catalog running, plus all my music editing software, as well as two City of Heroes processes running (connected to server). But, even at 100 it's very smooth sailing, and alt-tabbing from Photoshop CS3 to DivX (encoding a video) seems to go well.

I guess, even if XP can't run 200 apps, I can't see why it would ever be necessary. At 100 apps it's pretty much insanity and I had to run absolutely everything (some things two or three times, and browser over a dozen seperate processes). As long as it's stable for what you do run, then I guess your OS of choice is fine and dandy.

Certainly is a far cry from the good old DOS days! :D
Reply

BeautifulAgony was starred BeautifulAgony was unstarred

puhsitch
02/03/09

@Jhwk: On a Mac, all documents are shown as being within a single instance of their respective applications, so the definition wouldn't really be an issue in that respect.
Reply

puhsitch was starred puhsitch was unstarred

Accelerata
02/03/09

@puhsitch: that's not really true. multiple instances of the same application can share a single copy of the instruction sequence in memory. any OS that doesn't do that these days is several decades behind the times. but the point is that two copies of the same application != two copies of two different applications.

unfortunately, demonstrating that you can not crash when running lots of processes is a really crappy test. basic UNIX variants have been able to do this for decades, so its not exactly the forefront of computing. what's a more interesting test for the OS is the aggregate performance of the applications, since that speaks to the resource management capabilities of the OS (although you'd have to install two different OS's on the same hardware in order to be certain you were avoiding performance differences from hardware).
Reply

Accelerata was starred Accelerata was unstarred

BeautifulAgony
02/03/09

@Accelerata: Thanks, you much more eloquently crystalized my thoughts. Have 200 concurrently open apps (even if they are all unique instances, or completely seperate apps) is not necessarily indicative that all is well in computerville. I highly doubt he could have gotten anything done in Photoshop, or run World of Warcraft, or City of Heroes with adequate performance with all of that there. In such a case, what is the point? It's akin to the "phonebooth stuffing" fad of the 1950s... somewhat amusing and impressive in a curious way, but certainly serves no useful function.

I still believe that it only underscores that there was a lot of RAM, and probably a lot of disk paging going on. I'm not saying that it's not impressive, because in a geeky, absolutely useless way, it is.
Reply

BeautifulAgony was starred BeautifulAgony was unstarred

GitEmSteveDave_ForgotNametag
02/03/09

In reply to Mac OS X Running 200 Apps Keeps the Race Going
I've been using macs since my first Perform 475, and I can't even think of 200 apps.
Reply

SegamanXero
02/03/09

@PunchesSmallAnimals_GitEmSteve...: I've been doing macs since my hand me down Apple IIe and Mac Plus I saved from the garbage...

I can't think of 50 apps open, forget 200!
Reply

SegamanXero was starred SegamanXero was unstarred

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
11/25/08

In reply to Jet Pack Crosses 1,500-Foot Long Colorado Canyon, Breaks World Record
I always liked getting onto the bridge and jumping around up and down to the horror of others walking by.
Reply

Lite: hates Illinois Nazis
11/25/08

In reply to Jet Pack Crosses 1,500-Foot Long Colorado Canyon, Breaks World Record
Hey ya'll! Watch this!
Reply

GitEmSteveDave_ForgotNametag
11/25/08

In reply to Jet Pack Crosses 1,500-Foot Long Colorado Canyon, Breaks World Record
Is that a can of Brawndo in his hand?
Reply

discounteggroll
11/25/08

@Git Em SteveDave loves this guy->★:

it's what power-plant capable jetpacks crave
Reply

discounteggroll was starred discounteggroll was unstarred

GitEmSteveDave_ForgotNametag
11/25/08

@Git Em SteveDave loves this guy->★: What am I thinking about, it's obviously Rocket Fuel. It's Crizzappy!
Reply

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Gizmodo Team

SUBSCRIBE TO Gizmodo

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment