In fact, Android doesn't do "true multitasking" (a term they coined since I never heard of "true multitasking" until a fanboy mentioned it). No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking".
Never heard that one before. Where did you find that? If there's some at least semi-official definition somewhere it would put to rest all the silly arguments about whose mobile OS really multitasks.
FWIW I don't see why it's important to know anyway, nor what's lost or gained by the different uses, but for you and a couple of others it seems to be an important distinction.
Never heard that one before. Where did you find that? If there's some at least semi-official definition somewhere it would put to rest all the silly arguments about whose mobile OS really multitasks.
FWIW I don't see why it's important to know anyway, nor what's lost or gained by the different uses, but for you and a couple of others it seems to be an important distinction.
1) He didn't bring it up.
2) The distinction is quite simple. It's about the ability of the OS which means that iOS has been doing "true" multitasking since its inception.
3) Let's remember that it's multitasking not multi-apping, but even if we want to use that term (which I may have just invented) iOS was doing it from the start if we consider the tasks that apps use, but what it didn't do until iOS 4.0 is allow 3rd-party apps to run in the background. That means that 2 3rd-party apps were not allowed to hold resources in memory at the same time, but a 3rd-party app on-screen would still work with as many built-in apps as the OS saw fit to run. So what we're really talking about isn't multitasking or even multi-apping, but multi-third-party-apping… which sounds pretty damn ridiculous to me.
I have an iPhone 3GS, an iPad 2 and a Samsung Galaxy tab 2 7" running jelly bean. I can honestly say that the android tablet is the worst of the three. Even the 3GS runs apps such as BBC iplayer and other on demand tv services much better than the Tab 2. As for office apps, nothing on the android tablet comes even close to iWork on iOS.
Spare me! Google changes their OS Android for the sole purpose of helping the cell phone maker sell new crap. It works simply like this.
Google keeps making a build of Android more complex than the last so it sucks a** on previous cell phone maker's hardware. It's a calculated effort between Google and the hardware guys.
I don't think it's done to screw the older phones. The OS has matured since Gingerbread, it's less toyish and more refined now. I admire how Apple can keep older phones up to date but that's something Android will have a difficult time with as long as there are manufacturers making low end phones and using a older version of Android.
2) The distinction is quite simple. It's about the ability of the OS which means that iOS has been doing "true" multitasking since its inception.
3) Let's remember that it's multitasking not multi-apping, but even if we want to use that term (which I may have just invented) iOS was doing it from the start if we consider the tasks that apps use, but what it didn't do until iOS 4.0 is allow 3rd-party apps to run in the background. That means that 2 3rd-party apps were not allowed to hold resources in memory at the same time, but a 3rd-party app on-screen would still work with as many built-in apps as the OS saw fit to run. So what we're really talking about isn't multitasking or even multi-apping, but multi-third-party-apping… which sounds pretty damn ridiculous to me.
1. Sure he did. If it wasn't just his own personal definition I'd like to see where it came from. It could help end some silly claims from all sides.
2. It could be. Good luck with wide agreement outside of Apple-friendly blogs and forums.
3. Pretty much agree. I don't know why the distinction is important either.
I'm pretty darn sure that Eric said Android won't multi-task according to the definition he offered. Read it again.
No, he said that Android will kill apps if needs RAM which would call into question whether it's real multitasking which is really in the same ball park as what Apple does by only allowing certain APIs for 3rd-party apps to run in the background and killing the apps if it needs the RAM. This is how a mobile OS should operate. Again, he was responding to mercury99's foolish comment that there is no real multitasking.
wow, first time I've looked at an article about android on a apple site, but I must say I'm disappointed. I haven't seen a comment thread filled with such bile for ages
But I thought I might clear a few things up. The vast majority of apps are compatible back to 2.3, there is a support library for developers that includes things like fragments that have been introduced in newer versions of android. Google services are separated from the OS and bundled into the google play services and updates are pushed out without the user even knowing. Sharing info between apps is very easy, the sending app asks the OS for something that can, for example, play a video, all apps that say they can are presented in a list for the user to select(defaults can also be set) as far as I know iOS has nothing as flexible as that.
Quote:
EricTheHalfBee-
iOS has always been a fully pre-emptive, multitasking, multi-threaded OS. Apple made a "choice" to not allow third party Apps to run in the background. They then did a very smart thing in 4.0 and added "services" where you could have a portion of your App run in the background for tasks that actually NEED multitasking (phone calls, e-mail, notifications, location, audio and so on).
Apple could allow third party Apps to multitask tomorrow by "flipping a switch" in their OS. There's nothing missing or faulty with the core architecture of iOS that prevents multitasking, as many Android fanboys constantly try to insinuate.
In fact, Android doesn't do "true multitasking" (a term they coined since I never heard of "true multitasking" until a fanboy mentioned it). Android, like iOS, does not have virtual memory or a swap file and will force close Apps when resources run low. No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". Apps can be suspended or swapped out to virtual memory, but they shouldn't be closed outright. Android does this. So does iOS. They both remember the "state" the App was in so it can be "restarted" in such a way to make the user think the App was always running when in fact it wasn't.
Pre-emptive multitasking multithreaded magic machine??That does sound awesome. But your basicly right about how they handle multitasking. And no apps run in the background on iOS except for a few very clearly defined API's like playing audio, but on android apps don't have to explain why that want to continue processing in the background, for example I use a upnp controller app to send audio or video from my media server to my tv and it can maintain the connection to both and continue through the playlist even if I'm using another app, I don't think such a thing is alowed on iOS, can the system be abused? sure, but if an app does that its easy to know because the battery usage of every app is listed.
And task managers are stupid, most of the apps they list are stopped and harmless, or pre-emptively cached, android trys to have about 80% of RAM filled at all time, any RAM that isn't in use is used to cache frequently used apps. Use a task manager to kill a cached app? android sees free space and fills it, so you would end up using more power not less
iOS is nice, but smartphones are computers, and having so many limitations just makes it so much less useful to me. And I seriously HATE iTunes, needing to sync to that piece of crap to copy anything to my phone will never be acceptable.
I'm pretty darn sure that Eric said Android won't multi-task according to the definition he offered. Read it again.
I'm pretty damn sure I didn't.
What I did say is that iOS and Android are very similar - so similar it would make many Android fanboys upset to realize it. Android is also fully pre-emptive multi-threaded and multitasking just like iOS.
The ONLY difference is what PERMISSIONS they allow third party Apps. Android allows them to run while iOS doesn't. It's a design CHOICE made by each side and not a function of the architecture of the kernel.
As to the "definition" of what true multitasking is, it can't really be defined since it's a made up term. But Android fanboys love it since they think they can point out something Android does that iOS doesn't, which I pointed out was false in my original post. Just like how the Android fanboys love to use the term "open source" without having a clue what it really means. Which is ironic since these same fanboys are always chirping about how Android users are more tech-savvy than iOS users.
I think a few haters need to do a Youtube search for "Audiobus" and look at all the demos and then come back and say iOS can't multitask.
When they see an iPad multitask 3-4 audio Apps and see sounds being played (input source), manipulated (effects processing) and recorded (to a multitrack DAW) in real-time their heads might explode. Android can't even run a single audio App without running into lag issues.
What I did say is that iOS and Android are very similar - so similar it would make many Android fanboys upset to realize it. Android is also fully pre-emptive multi-threaded and multitasking just like iOS.
The ONLY difference is what PERMISSIONS they allow third party Apps. Android allows them to run while iOS doesn't. It's a design CHOICE made by each side and not a function of the architecture of the kernel.
As to the "definition" of what true multitasking is, it can't really be defined since it's a made up term. But Android fanboys love it since they think they can point out something Android does that iOS doesn't, which I pointed out was false in my original post. Just like how the Android fanboys love to use the term "open source" without having a clue what it really means. Which is ironic since these same fanboys are always chirping about how Android users are more tech-savvy than iOS users.
Eric, I went back are re-read what you originally wrote. In hindsight I read it a bit too strictly instead of seeing the idea you were trying to convey. My apologies.
wow, first time I've looked at an article about android on a apple site, but I must say I'm disappointed. I haven't seen a comment thread filled with such bile for ages
And no apps run in the background on iOS except for a few very clearly defined API's like playing audio,
Take your own advice.
Apple Apps will run in the background and multitask. API's are for third party Apps, not Apple's own Apps in the OS itself. You shouldn't call others stupid and then post something incorrect yourself.
Never heard that one before. Where did you find that? If there's some at least semi-official definition somewhere it would put to rest all the silly arguments about whose mobile OS really multitasks.
FWIW I don't see why it's important to know anyway, nor what's lost or gained by the different uses, but for you and a couple of others it seems to be an important distinction.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
In fact, Android doesn't do "true multitasking" (a term they coined since I never heard of "true multitasking" until a fanboy mentioned it). No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking".
Never heard that one before. Where did you find that? If there's some at least semi-official definition somewhere it would put to rest all the silly arguments about whose mobile OS really multitasks.
FWIW I don't see why it's important to know anyway, nor what's lost or gained by the different uses, but for you and a couple of others it seems to be an important distinction.
1) He didn't bring it up.
2) The distinction is quite simple. It's about the ability of the OS which means that iOS has been doing "true" multitasking since its inception.
3) Let's remember that it's multitasking not multi-apping, but even if we want to use that term (which I may have just invented) iOS was doing it from the start if we consider the tasks that apps use, but what it didn't do until iOS 4.0 is allow 3rd-party apps to run in the background. That means that 2 3rd-party apps were not allowed to hold resources in memory at the same time, but a 3rd-party app on-screen would still work with as many built-in apps as the OS saw fit to run. So what we're really talking about isn't multitasking or even multi-apping, but multi-third-party-apping… which sounds pretty damn ridiculous to me.
I don't think it's done to screw the older phones. The OS has matured since Gingerbread, it's less toyish and more refined now. I admire how Apple can keep older phones up to date but that's something Android will have a difficult time with as long as there are manufacturers making low end phones and using a older version of Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
1) He didn't bring it up.
2) The distinction is quite simple. It's about the ability of the OS which means that iOS has been doing "true" multitasking since its inception.
3) Let's remember that it's multitasking not multi-apping, but even if we want to use that term (which I may have just invented) iOS was doing it from the start if we consider the tasks that apps use, but what it didn't do until iOS 4.0 is allow 3rd-party apps to run in the background. That means that 2 3rd-party apps were not allowed to hold resources in memory at the same time, but a 3rd-party app on-screen would still work with as many built-in apps as the OS saw fit to run. So what we're really talking about isn't multitasking or even multi-apping, but multi-third-party-apping… which sounds pretty damn ridiculous to me.
1. Sure he did. If it wasn't just his own personal definition I'd like to see where it came from. It could help end some silly claims from all sides.
2. It could be. Good luck with wide agreement outside of Apple-friendly blogs and forums.
3. Pretty much agree. I don't know why the distinction is important either.
No, he did. mercury99 is the one that said they can't do real multitasking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
No, he did. mercury99 is the one that said they can't do real multitasking.
I'm pretty darn sure that Eric said Android won't multi-task according to the definition he offered. Read it again.
No, he said that Android will kill apps if needs RAM which would call into question whether it's real multitasking which is really in the same ball park as what Apple does by only allowing certain APIs for 3rd-party apps to run in the background and killing the apps if it needs the RAM. This is how a mobile OS should operate. Again, he was responding to mercury99's foolish comment that there is no real multitasking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
2. It could be. Good luck with wide agreement outside of Apple-friendly blogs and forums.
Interestingly, mercury99 failed to mention regarding the reference to a Wikipedia page where it states:
Quote:
"Before iOS 4, multitasking was limited to a selection of the applications Apple included on the device."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS#Multitasking
wow, first time I've looked at an article about android on a apple site, but I must say I'm disappointed. I haven't seen a comment thread filled with such bile for ages
But I thought I might clear a few things up. The vast majority of apps are compatible back to 2.3, there is a support library for developers that includes things like fragments that have been introduced in newer versions of android. Google services are separated from the OS and bundled into the google play services and updates are pushed out without the user even knowing. Sharing info between apps is very easy, the sending app asks the OS for something that can, for example, play a video, all apps that say they can are presented in a list for the user to select(defaults can also be set) as far as I know iOS has nothing as flexible as that.
Quote:
EricTheHalfBee-
iOS has always been a fully pre-emptive, multitasking, multi-threaded OS. Apple made a "choice" to not allow third party Apps to run in the background. They then did a very smart thing in 4.0 and added "services" where you could have a portion of your App run in the background for tasks that actually NEED multitasking (phone calls, e-mail, notifications, location, audio and so on).
Apple could allow third party Apps to multitask tomorrow by "flipping a switch" in their OS. There's nothing missing or faulty with the core architecture of iOS that prevents multitasking, as many Android fanboys constantly try to insinuate.
In fact, Android doesn't do "true multitasking" (a term they coined since I never heard of "true multitasking" until a fanboy mentioned it). Android, like iOS, does not have virtual memory or a swap file and will force close Apps when resources run low. No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". Apps can be suspended or swapped out to virtual memory, but they shouldn't be closed outright. Android does this. So does iOS. They both remember the "state" the App was in so it can be "restarted" in such a way to make the user think the App was always running when in fact it wasn't.
Pre-emptive multitasking multithreaded magic machine??That does sound awesome. But your basicly right about how they handle multitasking. And no apps run in the background on iOS except for a few very clearly defined API's like playing audio, but on android apps don't have to explain why that want to continue processing in the background, for example I use a upnp controller app to send audio or video from my media server to my tv and it can maintain the connection to both and continue through the playlist even if I'm using another app, I don't think such a thing is alowed on iOS, can the system be abused? sure, but if an app does that its easy to know because the battery usage of every app is listed.
And task managers are stupid, most of the apps they list are stopped and harmless, or pre-emptively cached, android trys to have about 80% of RAM filled at all time, any RAM that isn't in use is used to cache frequently used apps. Use a task manager to kill a cached app? android sees free space and fills it, so you would end up using more power not less
iOS is nice, but smartphones are computers, and having so many limitations just makes it so much less useful to me. And I seriously HATE iTunes, needing to sync to that piece of crap to copy anything to my phone will never be acceptable.
wait one more year android users know the difference between apple and android . most of the android users are start up age .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
blah, blah, blah... My mistake was assuming you had any interest in knowing the difference... blah blah blah
No.
For that there is Bing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Ok ok I got that point several posts ago. No need to keep hammering it in.
Sorry, just that some are quicker than others who need a reminder of the context of what they are replying too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
I'm pretty darn sure that Eric said Android won't multi-task according to the definition he offered. Read it again.
I'm pretty damn sure I didn't.
What I did say is that iOS and Android are very similar - so similar it would make many Android fanboys upset to realize it. Android is also fully pre-emptive multi-threaded and multitasking just like iOS.
The ONLY difference is what PERMISSIONS they allow third party Apps. Android allows them to run while iOS doesn't. It's a design CHOICE made by each side and not a function of the architecture of the kernel.
As to the "definition" of what true multitasking is, it can't really be defined since it's a made up term. But Android fanboys love it since they think they can point out something Android does that iOS doesn't, which I pointed out was false in my original post. Just like how the Android fanboys love to use the term "open source" without having a clue what it really means. Which is ironic since these same fanboys are always chirping about how Android users are more tech-savvy than iOS users.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
In fact, Android doesn't do "true multitasking" (a term they coined since I never heard of "true multitasking" until a fanboy mentioned it).
That would have been a Nokia fanboy, back when Symbian was as dominant as Android is now, before iOS and Android ate their lunch.
I think most of them now support Samsung.
I think a few haters need to do a Youtube search for "Audiobus" and look at all the demos and then come back and say iOS can't multitask.
When they see an iPad multitask 3-4 audio Apps and see sounds being played (input source), manipulated (effects processing) and recorded (to a multitrack DAW) in real-time their heads might explode. Android can't even run a single audio App without running into lag issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
I'm pretty damn sure I didn't.
What I did say is that iOS and Android are very similar - so similar it would make many Android fanboys upset to realize it. Android is also fully pre-emptive multi-threaded and multitasking just like iOS.
The ONLY difference is what PERMISSIONS they allow third party Apps. Android allows them to run while iOS doesn't. It's a design CHOICE made by each side and not a function of the architecture of the kernel.
As to the "definition" of what true multitasking is, it can't really be defined since it's a made up term. But Android fanboys love it since they think they can point out something Android does that iOS doesn't, which I pointed out was false in my original post. Just like how the Android fanboys love to use the term "open source" without having a clue what it really means. Which is ironic since these same fanboys are always chirping about how Android users are more tech-savvy than iOS users.
Eric, I went back are re-read what you originally wrote. In hindsight I read it a bit too strictly instead of seeing the idea you were trying to convey. My apologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheapbeerbaron
wow, first time I've looked at an article about android on a apple site, but I must say I'm disappointed. I haven't seen a comment thread filled with such bile for ages
And no apps run in the background on iOS except for a few very clearly defined API's like playing audio,
Take your own advice.
Apple Apps will run in the background and multitask. API's are for third party Apps, not Apple's own Apps in the OS itself. You shouldn't call others stupid and then post something incorrect yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Never heard that one before. Where did you find that? If there's some at least semi-official definition somewhere it would put to rest all the silly arguments about whose mobile OS really multitasks.
FWIW I don't see why it's important to know anyway, nor what's lost or gained by the different uses, but for you and a couple of others it seems to be an important distinction.
2007 N95 discussion "true multitasking"
Here are a couple gems