RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘Fake’

Create Automated Website Tests with Ease

12 Oct


This post is part of Mashable’s Spark of Genius series, which highlights a unique feature of startups. The series is made possible by Microsoft BizSpark.. If you would like to have your startup considered for inclusion, please see the details here.

Name: Fake

Quick Pitch: Fake is a new browser for Mac OS X that makes web automation and testing simple.

Genius Idea: Inspired by Apple’s Automator, Fake is a tool that lets web designers and developers create graphical workflows that can be run again and again, without human interaction. These workflows can be saved, shared and edited at ease.

Fake is the creation of Todd Ditchendorf’s Celestial Teapot Software. Ditchendorf is the guy responsible for Fluid, one of our favorite single-site browsers.

Whereas Fluid is a great tool that can appeal to a wide array of users, Fake’s target audience consists of developers, web designers or people that have to perform the same automated tasks repeatedly. That is to say, if you aren’t doing a lot of website testing, unit tests or debugging, Fake might not be for you.

However, if you are a web designer or developer, Fake is just awesome. I’ve been using this app for the last month or so and I have to say, the ability to create workflows to perform rudimentary tasks like capturing a screenshot or filling out a form or clicking on a link is just really remarkable.

A common workflow I utilize is taking screenshots. Oftentimes when I’m writing a post, I’ll need a screenshot from lots of different sources. Rather than taking each screenshot individually, I can just enter in each URL into Fake and have it repeat the “capture screenshot” action for each site. That way, while I’m writing in the background, my screenshots are being captured and saved to a folder of my choice.

For testing purposes especially, the fact that Fake has assertions, assertion failure handlers and error handlers makes it really powerful. It’s often hard to get a real sense of how a site or web app is going to perform under certain conditions. User testing is great, but it can be expensive and time consuming, especially if you need to test various alternating aspects of a site.

The great thing about saving workflows is that you can modify or rerun the workflow against other content. So for people doing A/B testing, you can set up the same set of “fake” interactions for each version and compare results.

Fake is $29.95, but you can download a free trial to see how you like the app. The trial doesn’t let you save workflows and limits you to eight actions at a time, but it’s a great way to determine whether you need this kind of app.

Check out this video to see Fake in action:

Designers and developers — what types of tools do you use for unit or automated testing? Let us know.


Sponsored by Microsoft BizSpark


BizSpark is a startup program that gives you three-year access to the latest Microsoft development tools, as well as connecting you to a nationwide network of investors and incubators. There are no upfront costs, so if your business is privately owned, less than three years old, and generates less than U.S.$1 million in annual revenue, you can sign up today.


Reviews: fluid

More About: automator, fake, fluid, mac apps, single-site browser, software, unit testing

For more Dev & Design coverage:


 
 

High School Students Bust Restaurants And Grocery Stores For Selling Mislabeled Fish [Something Fishy]

22 Aug

Two high school students decided to see if New Yorkers were really getting what they paid for when they ordered expensive fish. Guess what? Sometimes, they weren't.

From the New York Times:

They hit 4 restaurants and 10 grocery stores in Manhattan. Once the samples were home, whether in doggie bags or shopping bags, they cut away a small piece and preserved it in alcohol. They sent those off to the University of Guelph in Ontario, where the Barcode of Life Database project began. A graduate student there, Eugene Wong, works on the Fish Barcode of Life (dubbed, inevitably, Fish-BOL) and agreed to do the genetic analysis. He compared the teenagers’ samples with the global library of 30,562 bar codes representing nearly 5,500 fish species. (Commercial labs will also perform the analysis for a fee.)

Three hundred dollars’ worth of meals later, the young researchers had their data back from Guelph: 2 of the 4 restaurants and 6 of the 10 grocery stores had sold mislabeled fish.

This isn't really surprising, considering that the Chicago Sun-Times did essentially the same thing and found that none of their 14 samples of "red snapper" were actually "red snapper."

One fish monger who passed the DNA test was glad that the kids (with the help of one of the girl's father, who is a scientist) did the testing:

John Leonard, the owner [of Leonards’ Seafood and Prime Meats on Third Avenue], said he was not surprised to find that his products passed the bar code test. “We go down and pick the fish out ourselves,” he said. “We know what we’re doing.” As for the technology, Mr. Leonard said, “it’s good for the public,” since “it would probably keep restaurateurs and owners of markets more on their toes.”

Fish Tale Has DNA Hook: Students Find Bad Labels [NYT](Thanks, Jon!)


 
Comments Off on High School Students Bust Restaurants And Grocery Stores For Selling Mislabeled Fish [Something Fishy]

Posted in Uncategorized