Apple rumored allowing real background apps on iPhone

[AppleInsider]

After leaving its once-touted background push data feature by the wayside, Apple is now reportedly mulling an option that would let iPhone apps run third-party background processes and give the phone true app multitasking.

The hint of a change in strategy was given to Mac Rumors, which now hears from unspecified sources that Apple is considering the switch away from its original approach and may let programs operate as "user selectable background processes."

Why such a move would occur isn't known. When the iPhone maker first unveiled background push notification at the Worldwide Developers Conference in 2008, the company famously chastised Microsoft and most other smartphone OS developers for challenging users with difficult solutions to quitting or switching between apps and suggested that then-current phones couldn't handle the task. Even so, the solution precludes background use of third-party apps that need always-on access, like radio or VoIP calling software.

At the June event, Apple said it considered background push notification an ideal compromise that would close apps but keep them "listening" for data through an Internet channel; an instant messaging app could signal that it has received new messages without having to stay open and chew up system time.

However, the company has since remained almost entirely silent on the matter. Where early iPhone 2.1 beta firmware included background notifications, the fourth developer test version pulled the feature altogether without any commentary on Apple's part beyond an alleged reply e-mail from CEO Steve Jobs, who stated that company wanted to get background push "100% right the first time." The official 2.1 and 2.2 releases have similarly passed on the feature while adding others.

While no additional evidence has come up to support theories that the delay is being used to implement true background processes, speculation has surfaced that Apple may have to wait until its next major iPhone revision to implement the necessary code. With a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of temporary memory, the first- and second-generation iPhone lines may struggle to support more than one or two background apps before becoming unusable. If the feature requires a new ARM processor or additional memory to be useful, Apple could either restrict the number of third-party background processes on older models or else disable the feature entirely for these devices.

The Cupertino, Calif.-based firm may nonetheless be under pressure to add the support in spite of cutting off legacy hardware. In addition to existing competitors that already had background support but have only recently launched direct iPhone alternatives, Palm's new Pre smartphone will have more authentic multitasking in an iPhone-like interface by letting users shuffle or toss "cards" that represent active software.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[FreakyT]

I could definitely see Apple adding this only for their next generation phones, citing some fabricated hardware restriction.

I certainly hope I'm wrong though.

[malax]

Originally Posted by FreakyT

I could definitely see Apple adding this only for their next generation phones, citing some fabricated hardware restriction.

Because nothing a corporation says could ever be the truth? Or is it just Apple who you don't believe?

[palegolas]

Since Apple sets the rules of what's in the app store they can set the rules and standards. Should they support bg tasks (which seems wise to a point) I expect them to give the developers the tools to easily go into bg mode, where only minimal resources and cpu cycles are given each app. Something like that...

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by FreakyT

I could definitely see Apple adding this only for their next generation phones, citing some fabricated hardware restriction. ...

Dude, right in the article less than an inch above your comment it says:

"... a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of (RAM) ..."

That's just reality; not fabricated at all.

[hohlecow]

I'd like to see an API for registering data retrieval. Background apps would be nice, but I understand why you wouldn't want to have them, but I really would like NNW to be able to fetch news, Twitterific to fetch tweets, and AIM to fetch messages in the background. This could be done with push, but it puts a huge burden on app developers to provide a push service.

A data retrieval API could allow an app to fetch along with the mail fetching schedule so the radio is only turned on once.

[junkie]

1) seem like Palm apps are all in webkit, so the resources needed are not as great.
2) support bg tasks seems like it would require a boost in CPU. seems like iPhone just barely scrapes by with the current demand on the CPU.

[nagromme]

I like Apple's original solution--clean and efficient. I hope they complete that plan.

For future, faster devices, "true" multitasking would be fine. But on current handhelds, I like an app in the background to be paused and not using resources--which is essentially how Apple's home screen works, as long as the app in question is properly designed to remember its state.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

... If Apple can't deliver on it's plan because the phone doesn't have enough ram or processor power I'm going to be PISSED. ... They better make a solution for the phone I have and not the next phone otherwise it's FRAUD. ... Apple get off your ass and give us what we paid for and you promised NOT what you think is right ...

After reading your posts over the last year or so I'm starting to wonder if there is ever anything you are NOT pissed about.

I'm guessing you hate puppy dogs, sunshine and smiling children as well?

[delreyjones]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

They better make a solution for the phone I have and not the next phone otherwise it's FRAUD.

They got sued 4 times this week alone just wait until they announce that the 3G isn't powerful enough to deliver as promised. The Class Action Lawsuits are going to be coming now from every country that has an iPhone.

Apple get off your ass and give us what we paid for and you promised NOT what you think is right for us now.

Wow! Sounds like you bought on iPhone largely because of what Apple suggested it could do in the future, as opposed to what it was capable of doing at the time you bought it. Is that right? I buy things based on what they can do at the time of purchase, and then, if they get better with time, that's icing on the cake. Do you ever buy M$ products based on what Gates and Balmer say they'll be able to do in the future?

[FreakyT]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

Dude, right in the article less than an inch above your comment it says:

"... a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of (RAM) ..."

That's just reality; not fabricated at all.

For any of you who have Jailbroken phones, you'll find that apps actually run quite well in the background on an iPhone 2G. So I'd say, yes, any restriction on Apple's part would indeed be a blatant fabrication. Of course, we're basically arguing over speculation here...

(thanks to the work of these guys, at any rate: http://code.google.com/p/iphone-backgrounder/)

[mdriftmeyer]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

After reading your posts over the last year or so I'm starting to wonder if there is ever anything you are NOT pissed about.

I'm guessing you hate puppy dogs, sunshine and smiling children as well?

It probably stems from the Newton being shut down. Most likely, he was one of the protestors I passed on my way into work, the day the lights went out on Newton and Newton OS.

[talkshowonmute]

Originally Posted by FreakyT

I could definitely see Apple adding this only for their next generation phones, citing some fabricated hardware restriction.

I certainly hope I'm wrong though.

Because its so wrong for a company to only implement features it sees fit for a particular device like it said if the current and previous iPhones just arent cut up to handle real multitasking why would apple release it to those products and lessen the publics opinion of an already pretty sweet product. Sometimes thats what you get for buying early i played around with a bunch of iphones and I bought an iPod touch for like a day until i decided that i idnt want the touch if the touch didnt have a phone lol.. Hopefully it brings something good Its coming out in June for my birthday on June 11th HEe hEe

[mjtomlin]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

Apple said that push would be out in September and yes I did base my purchase on this.
I held out until it was announced as did many other people that realized that the 3G was useless to upgrade to without it and not worth the upgrade price.

Well if they said September and it's now February, why haven't you already sued for fraud? You can't sue a company for delaying a release or changing/dropping future features. If that were the case Microsoft would've been sued into the ground by this time.

If you based your buying decision off of future feature sets rather than current features, then you took that risk. There may be many technical reasons as to why Apple never released the Push Notification System for the iPhone, we don't know. And although Steve said that the PNS would made available to developers in September of '08, he also said they wanna make sure it's working at 100%. There was obviously something wrong, otherwise they wouldn't have pulled it from subsequent developer seeds.

Suing someone doesn't automatically make them guilty; these 3G lawsuits will more than likely be dismissed as ignorance on the part of the consumer. Apple doesn't own the 3G signal or network, they can only make potential claims. If the technology involved allows for up to twice the speed as EDGE, then they can in fact make that claim. Anyone who has ever connected to a network, should know that speed always varies. I've never had a network connection where the connection throughput was maxed out all the time... it just doesn't exist. Apple says a high-speed connection is required for certain things to function properly, should they be sued when Joe Public's high speed internet connection doesn't work with some of Apple's offerings, because it's a crappy connection? Not all... this is the same argument.

[mjtomlin]

The iPhone is perfectly capable of running background applications. There are many background processes running on the current version. The only thing Apple restricts is users running multiple applications and preventing applications from spawning their own background processes.

I think a better way of handling 'keep alive' connections, is to allow some applications to go into a hibernate state, via some sort of user confirmation just as with allowing the 'use location services' in some applications.

One thing I have noticed however, is that my mail and calendar notifications no longer seem like they're "pushed". When MobileMe started I would get little badge notifications even before I open up Mail, now I no longer do. Mail only updates itself when I open up individual mailboxes?

[GQB]

ooh... can't wait for my battery to be drained even faster by some runaway cycle sucker.

[arteckx]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

Apple said that push would be out in September and yes I did base my purchase on this.
I held out until it was announced as did many other people that realized that the 3G was useless to upgrade to without it and not worth the upgrade price.

Your bad. Push notification was a feature discussed with developers, not consumers. Even if all developers showed interest in adding push notification to their applications, there's no guarantee that specific developers would follow through with releasing the particular applications that you use with push support. Although, I suppose someone might want to file a suit against those developers too. Once again, buy for current features, but wait for future features to materialize if they're that important to you.

Now, if you paid the $99 to join the developer program and all of your application concepts required the push notification service, so you're actually down $99, I might feel a little bit bad for you because getting done what you can is normally a good thing. However, the disclaimer of liability in the developer agreement takes care of that legally, so that's just a sad outcome of a known risk.

[Dueces]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

With a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of temporary memory, the first- and second-generation iPhone lines may struggle to support more than one or two background apps before becoming unusable. If the feature requires a new ARM processor or additional memory to be useful

I have a hard time believing this. I have a 2 year old Blackberry Curve, not exactly sure which processor it has, but I have 16 applications and 9 email "real push" accounts running at all times without a hiccup ever.
I can't imagine the hardware inside my blackberry is that far ahead of the iphone.

[KevinN206]

Originally Posted by GQB

ooh... can't wait for my battery to be drained even faster by some runaway cycle sucker.

Choice is good. Having the ability to run multiple programs when you want and at our choosing is great. After all, you've the choice of running just one program at a time. This is why the Palm Pre seems promising, since it runs 4+ programs so fluidly. If you're pressed for battery life, then close the programs you don't need. With the iPhone, you have no choice other than through unofficial means (i.e. jailbreak).

Runaway programs have little to do with the OS managing background process, whether it runs in the foreground or background. Poorly coded programs will consume CPU and battery life either way.

[arteckx]

Personally, I'd prefer push for most things. It does seem more refined than keeping things open.

The only applications that I'd really like in the background are Internet radio applications. I'm just as happy listening to free music that's similar to a song I picked as hand picking enough specific songs to buy. I don't think I'd see any adverse effects. Battery life is fine for me while doing that, so I don't think opening Mail for like 10 seconds to see if the message I just received is anything important would be a battery killer. That's all I'd probably use it for.

[mrochester]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

Dude, right in the article less than an inch above your comment it says:

"... a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of (RAM) ..."

That's just reality; not fabricated at all.

This all boils down to OSX being 'too fat' for the hardware. Other smartphone OSes with less processing power and the same amount of RAM can multitask with no problem at all. In fact, I could open every application on the phone at once on my N95-8GB (that's a good 40-50 apps). The problem Apple has is that they have taken their desktop OS and tried to shoehorn it into a smartphone platform, seemingly without truly considering the limited resources available. Apple need to work on streamlining and tightening their code so that the base OS isn't such a resource hog, and then they could very easily and efficiently allow multitasking.

[hittrj01]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

I held out until it was announced as did many other people that realized that the 3G was useless to upgrade to without it and not worth the upgrade price.

You do realize that all software related upgrades concerning the iPhone 3G are also released on the original iPhone as well, right? So your point of Apple tricking you out of your money to upgrade to the 3G is a complete lie, because the one feature you felt was worthy of an upgrade did not warrant an upgrade to begin with if you had the original, so that was your own fault. Please just do us all a favor and stop trying to pull things out of your a** just so you can fulfill your own personal vendetta against a company you obviously feel has wronged you. We all grow very tired of reading your senseless rants about nothing.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by FreakyT

I could definitely see Apple adding this only for their next generation phones, citing some fabricated hardware restriction.

I certainly hope I'm wrong though.

Why would you think it's fabricated? What purpose would Apple heve for doing that?

Considering the criticizm Apple has gotten because of this lack, it would have been better to have included it in the first place, if it were possible.

If they feel the first gen devices can't manage it properly, then they shouldn't have it. If second gen devices can manage it, then they should have it.

Why is that hard to believe?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

Let me get this straight. Since Apple can't deliver on it's promise for Push your willing to wait for the next phone and have to Pay For It.

That's beyond FanBoy.

I think we're talking about two things here, and we don't know if either is true.

We don't know that Apple is dropping Push, and we don't know if Apple is adopting multitasking.

Hey, they could do both!

If Apple can't deliver on it's plan because the phone doesn't have enough ram or processor power I'm going to be PISSED.

They better make a solution for the phone I have and not the next phone otherwise it's FRAUD.

Apple never said that the current models didn't have enough power for Push. They have also said that background wasn't in the cards, so you have nothing there to be pissed about.

If somehow, at the last moment, Apple found they couldn't manage Push, it wouldn't be fraud. Fraud is only when someone knows in advance that what they are telling they will do isn't possible. That would have to be proven.

They got sued 4 times this week alone just wait until they announce that the 3G isn't powerful enough to deliver as promised. The Class Action Lawsuits are going to be coming now from every country that has an iPhone.

These people who sue for these reasons are idiots! They are looking for money. They figure this is a good way to try and get it.

Apple get off your ass and give us what we paid for and you promised NOT what you think is right for us now.

Why are you so upset about something that may very well be untrue?

[melgross]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

Apple said that push would be out in September and yes I did base my purchase on this.
I held out until it was announced as did many other people that realized that the 3G was useless to upgrade to without it and not worth the upgrade price.

I'm sorry you were expecting to depend on this feature. I mean that.

But to be realistic, this is software! 10.5 was delayed for a good 6 months. Vista was delayed three years!

You know that problems crop up that are unexpected.

There's no point in getting upset about it.

[melgross]

Originally Posted by Dueces

I have a hard time believing this. I have a 2 year old Blackberry Curve, not exactly sure which processor it has, but I have 16 applications and 9 email "real push" accounts running at all times without a hiccup ever.
I can't imagine the hardware inside my blackberry is that far ahead of the iphone.

RIM's OS is a much simpler, Real Time OS, which is what many other older OS's are. More full featured OS's such as the one on the iPhone, have more processes running, and many more API's. The programs for the iPhone can be much more complex than those on the Blackberry.

It's like the old Palmphones like my now mostly unused Treo 700p. They are very fast, though this OS is also non multitasking. But they can only do so much.

[irnchriz]

So, SDK 2.3 gets shipped to Devs, it contains new code for running your app in the background if the user chooses to do so. It reduces the CPU load and swaps the program into a 'disk cache' based in the users Flash memory. Due to the program running in a lower priority this balances out the access speed and allows for the lower load/swap time from flash.

To enable background apps the user is warned that this may reduce battery life and that a portion of the flash space is consumed.

This is rolled out and then with software 3.0 and the new handset in mid 2009 true push is launched and app developers either build their app with cloud push or as a background app. For example, Messaging clients run as cloud push but GPS tracker apps run as background apps.


As I am on an O2 contract I will upgrade to the new handset if they enable users to activley re-roll their contracts with the new hardware again. My iPhone 16GB only cost me £60 last time when I upgraded from the first iPhone. And before the iPhone I upgraded an an annual basis so pretty much nothing has changed for me in the way I handle my contracts. Mind you, if you are a PAYG customer or a sim-free/jail break user your kinda fucked.

[fryke]

I'm sure there are many uses for background push or actual background apps, but really it's messengers that would benefit the most. And let's get real: Those apps don't use that much processing power and they don't transmit that much data either. I'm sure "freedom" would create users that have three or four messengers plus FaceBook et al. open in the background (as well as their live poker apps all at the same time) which could lead to problems and crashes.

But if Apple stated in September that it would take them longer than expected, I think they should have updated the public about their progress. To postpone it (or a different approach to it) to the next version altogether _is_ a tad fraudulent, because although it was a "future" feature when the iPhone 3G was announced, it clearly was one of the more important features talked about. Not delivering it at all could be at least seen as false advertising. (I know it's not in the ads themselves, but the way they hyped about it, that _was_ advertising the feature.) It's a bit of a laughing stock, a smartphone that can't handle a messenger in the background.

[ivan.rnn01]

...go nuts to corrupt phone's memory, to kill processes, to implant trojan horses etc... Sandbox? There's none that could never be pierced. There's a nice bunch of smart guys near keyboards now...

[mrochester]

Don't forget the iPhone 3G is very heavily subsidized so chances are O2 won't be handing you an upgrade on a plate until your 18months is up.

Originally Posted by irnchriz

So, SDK 2.3 gets shipped to Devs, it contains new code for running your app in the background if the user chooses to do so. It reduces the CPU load and swaps the program into a 'disk cache' based in the users Flash memory. Due to the program running in a lower priority this balances out the access speed and allows for the lower load/swap time from flash.

To enable background apps the user is warned that this may reduce battery life and that a portion of the flash space is consumed.

This is rolled out and then with software 3.0 and the new handset in mid 2009 true push is launched and app developers either build their app with cloud push or as a background app. For example, Messaging clients run as cloud push but GPS tracker apps run as background apps.


As I am on an O2 contract I will upgrade to the new handset if they enable users to activley re-roll their contracts with the new hardware again. My iPhone 16GB only cost me £60 last time when I upgraded from the first iPhone. And before the iPhone I upgraded an an annual basis so pretty much nothing has changed for me in the way I handle my contracts. Mind you, if you are a PAYG customer or a sim-free/jail break user your kinda fucked.

[FullGaz]

I can't see why allowing background apps should be a problem on the iPhone. After all, it's running OS X, right? And also, the iPhone would never need a task manager either... In fact, the original Mac OS already provides a solution to knowing what application is running: the glowing dot under the icon in the Dock. The iPhone could employ the same trick to show the users what applications are running without having the need to use a task manager.
The only hold up, as has been already mentioned, is the limited amount of RAM available to running applications. For sure, Apple engineers could find a cool solution to that one too... It's not like the iPhone lacks memory...

[Hattig]

If Apple were to do this properly, they would probably come up with a scheme like:

1) Background Applications are stand-alone Applications. They might even extend a new base class called, for example, NSBackgroundApp. Indeed implementation wise they could be nothing more than modules that are run by a background application scheduler that can schedule for best resource conservation.

2) These Applications are restricted in scope, but can of course use any system library apart from those that generate interfaces

3) Their running time might be restricted, their memory usage likewise. E.g., they might only be able to run once every 5 seconds, and not exceed 1MB in running application size. In addition there might only be three or four background application slots.

4) If you are actively using the phone, or if it is being charged, then considerations for battery life can be temporarily dropped. I.e., if you are browsing the web then running an internet radio application in the background isn't such a big deal, (but when the phone is trying to run on minimal power it would be).

Also why would you swap out the application code to flash? Surely you would mmap the code on flash anyway, bringing it into RAM as required, and simply invalidating the pages if another application needs them?

As for resources, there's nothing wrong with a 412MHz ARM and 128MB RAM. Even in low-power mode which it surely runs in most of the time it is 103MHz (? I don't know, but I presume the CPU clocks down). I had pre-emptive multitasking with shared libraries on an 8MHz 68000 (Amiga 500) that performs like a 2MHz ARM. I've even seen very basic pre-emptive multitasking running on a 4MHz Z80 with 128KB RAM (SymbOS) with a Win95-like desktop environment.

[DocNo42]

Originally Posted by MacOldTimer

Let me get this straight. Since Apple can't deliver on it's promise for Push your willing to wait for the next phone and have to Pay For It.

Reading comprehension continues to not be your strong suite

Let's review his comment:

Originally Posted by nagromme

I like Apple's original solution--clean and efficient. I hope they complete that plan.

Your absolutely correct "I hope they complete that plan" is exactly the same as "since Apple can't deliver ... your willing to wait for the next phone and have to pay for it"

That's beyond FanBoy.

Your beyond anti-fanboy. You loathe Apple and their products and they can never do anything that isn't worthy of your criticism. Logic and rational thought are your enemy, and anyone who disagrees with you is shallow and biased.

If Apple can't deliver on it's plan because the phone doesn't have enough ram or processor power I'm going to be PISSED.

If Apple refunded your money (if you do indeed own product rather then just posting on forums) you'd still probably be pissed

They better make a solution for the phone I have and not the next phone otherwise it's FRAUD.

Really? Push wasn't part of the originally shipping phone, and it was presented as a potential new feature. And there is no confirmation that they still won't deliver it, just lots of rampant speculation - once again.

They got sued 4 times this week alone just wait until they announce that the 3G isn't powerful enough to deliver as promised.

These lawsuits will go the way of every other class action lawsuit, the lawyers will make out big and the "normal people" will get a penance as a "settlement" since the claims are essentially baseless, but under our screwy legal system it's cheaper to pay the sharks off then fight them. Sigh - for once I would like to see a company like Apple sue the scum lawyers that go on these fishing expeditions and recover their legal costs in dealing with this tripe.

The Class Action Lawsuits are going to be coming now from every country that has an iPhone.

hehe -that's funny - our legal system is laughed at in most other civilized countries, I doubt you will see such frivolous lawsuits in many other countries.

Apple get off your ass and give us what we paid for and you promised NOT what you think is right for us now.

Dude, you really need to stay off the rumor sites - you have anger management issues and the stress is probably going to stroke you out

[UltimateKylie]

Originally Posted by mrochester

This all boils down to OSX being 'too fat' for the hardware. Other smartphone OSes with less processing power and the same amount of RAM can multitask with no problem at all. In fact, I could open every application on the phone at once on my N95-8GB (that's a good 40-50 apps). The problem Apple has is that they have taken their desktop OS and tried to shoehorn it into a smartphone platform, seemingly without truly considering the limited resources available. Apple need to work on streamlining and tightening their code so that the base OS isn't such a resource hog, and then they could very easily and efficiently allow multitasking.

Yep, my Tilt has a 400mhz processor and 100MB or so of ram and I can run AIM, Live Messenger and Live Email (both of which sync every 15 minutes with my contacts online, so if I update a contact online or on my computer it gets updated to my phone). In addition I can easily open and keep open Opera without the phone crashing. I will though suggest problems in Windows Mobile's past have really been too little memory though I have always enjoyed it very much since getting my first PocketPC in 2000.

But the iPhone OS is fat. Windows Mobile currently takes between 32mb and 64mb depending on the rom. I think the iPhone OS was rumoured to take upwards of 700mb (or that is how much is reserved on the disk for it). In some aspects the iPhone was ahead mostly in great display and intergrated large amounts of memory which is first. In addition the GUI was far more user friendly for touch. But that is changing. The new WM now have large pixel displays, look at the Touch HD or Xperia. On my tilt now, I don't need a stylus for most functions thanx to TouchFlo2D. But on the otherhand I like a resitive screen as the stylus does allow more accurate input especially in drawings or note taking (without typing, its faster).

I do own a Touch, its fun. Love alot of the games. I do sometimes wonder if those app downloads and game downloads are wrongly attributed to the iPhone and not the Touch. In addition in regards to Windows Mobile (and its the same as my BF owns a Symbian phone) there is no way to track usage as you can download from such a huge variety of sites.

My last complaint is programs like AIM or even Pandora. I would love to listen to Pandora while I browse and AIM is useless as I'm not gonna check ever 15 min or hour to see if I got a message. Might as well keep my Windows Mobile phone which alerts me. Otherwise I would forget, people would think they sent me a message but I wouldn't get it till much later. The only thing AIM is useful for is if I wanto communicate now with someone online. I for the life of me can't see while Apple didn't address this from day one with either iChat or allow AIM to be a background task.

[S8ER01Z]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

Dude, right in the article less than an inch above your comment it says:

"... a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of (RAM) ..."

That's just reality; not fabricated at all.

x2... I don't know what the OS chews up on it's own but I have several applications that can barely run on their own and give high memory usage warniings. Multiple applications on this phone would be a big failure unless it was limited to specific low memory applications.

[S8ER01Z]

Originally Posted by DocNo42

Your beyond anti-fanboy. You loathe Apple and their products and they can never do anything that isn't worthy of your criticism. Logic and rational thought are your enemy, and anyone who disagrees with you is shallow and biased.

wut? Only two sides exist to that coin..your either a fanboy or not? How can you be something else?

[BlackSummerNight]

LOL, seems like WM task manger isn't so stupid now eh Steve. I wonder how they are going to spin the fact that they can't get Push working and now have to use background processes.

FYI: Backgrounder works fine. People who say battery life is worst....no shit, I have multiple apps open, it's expected. If I know I'm not going to be by my charger anytime soon, I don't run multiple apps, nor do I watch videos/movies. I've yet to be stuck somewhere with no more juice left in my phone.


HEY AI, WHEN ARE YOU GUYS GONNA DO A iPhone APP.

[Roc Ingersol]

Apple is not going to add a task manager to the iPhone. That is -still- a terrible idea.
No-one is even -asking- for third-party multitasking. They just want the Push API.

And that's going to take more RAM. Considering third-party apps are already running out of memory and crashing, releasing any additional multitasking will cause more apps to crash and generally piss off more users.

Likely, Apple simply rolled the API into the next major OS release, where they were already tightening down other areas of the operating system to free up some memory. Apple being Apple, they're just holding 3.0 tight to their chest so the features have maximum PR value this summer.

[arteckx]

Originally Posted by BlackSummerNight

LOL, seems like WM task manger isn't so stupid now eh Steve.

The WM task manager is still very stupid. It's a horrible implementation of background process control. Even people that try to copy this implementation seem to do a better job. But if this rumor about allowing background processes is true, they're going to at least implement it in a better way, if not totally different.

[coolfactor]

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

Dude, right in the article less than an inch above your comment it says:

"... a 412MHz ARM processor and only 128MB of (RAM) ..."

That's just reality; not fabricated at all.

My first Mac at 20Mhz and 1MB of RAM could multitask. The iPhone's OS is far more advanced, but is also slimmed down to be very efficient. Is 412MHz and 128MB of RAM still insufficient? I find that difficult to believe. Maybe we can hear from some iPhone devs about their thoughts on the matter.