- screen resolution upgraded from 480x320 163 ppi to 720x480 x ppi? Good chance. Great for games and watching on line video.
I really think this is unnecessary. The screen is small enough that no-one would pick if the resolution was finer. 480x320 on the iPhone is like a 35" plasma at 5000x3000 dpi.
It would be great if the iPhone could output HD 720p direct to a TV. Perhaps it could be a backdoor to an AppleTV - just plug your iPhone into a dock (on the TV) for online rentals. Not over 3G of course
"Various clues on the next version of the iPhone are being collected that point to a major architectural overhaul that could bring dramatically improved graphics performance to Apple's popular smartphone."
Major architectural overhaul? The ARM CPU will probably be upgraded to one using the Cortex-A8 core or even just a faster ARM11, and the PowerVR MBX graphics to the SGX, but I'm not sure I'd characterize it as a "major overhaul"... Maybe thats just me...
No it's not just you. They're incremental upgrades. There is no reason to make big changes, it's not like there is some fundamental weakness that needs to be addressed. They will probably fine tune their hardware, integrating and rationalising it along with addressing any requirements in the new software.
There may be some new features and incrementally better performance, but they're not going to change it into some multi-core speed demon. Priority number one is battery performance.
When a much better iPhone arrives, the current low end one can become a "Nano-iPhone" with a nice price reduction!
otherwise I replace my aging phone with a low end Nokia, then I at least will get featers new to me at least such as a color screen, camera, bluetooth and...
The new Nokia 6700c looks nice, but you'll have to wait until Q3 for that one.
Apple will probably try to address one of the most frequent complaints from the users :
-Camera : Apple will probably add video capture and increase the resolution. Maybe a flash also ?
And add/upgrade some components :
-An integrated compass, in order to be able to support true navigation software
-A more powerful processor & graphic chip, in order to compete with other mobile gaming platforms (the sales on AppStore show that the Iphone is largely used as a gaming platform, which may have surprised Apple). Could also allow to display on a TV with a better resolution.
-"System on a Chip" in order to lower the manufacturing price
- More storage capacity : 32 GB, and probably more RAM
Software is independent but the release of the new Iphone could be a good opportunity to release Iphone OS 3.0, with of course support of the new hardware but also improvements for the current generation of Iphones (probably search & sort functions for e-mails, cut & paste, ...)
Out of curiosity... why does one need that much space on a phone? I'm not trying to be rude either just a straight up question. On launch day I waited in line for the iPhone 3G and even though I was about 55 people back in line when the doors opened they still ran out of black iPhone 3G's so I thought about it and decided to just get the 8GB then and if I realized I needed more space later on I'd try to return it.
Turns out the 8GB model was plenty. I actually never even use more than 6 GB's at a time. I mean how much music can you listen to at one time? I mean even if you listened to music 24 hours a day I could still do that without a problem on my 8GB model. Plus, each time I get home I'm syncing/charging it and can easily swap playlists in two seconds etc. Same goes for movies. I mean I'll usually load it with an iTunes movie rental or other movie I have prior to flying or if I know I'm going to be waiting a long time somewhere.
I understand at some point the amount of flash drive space is too small, but based on the current compression sizes of most multi-media I'm not sure why someone really needs that large of a flash drive. Obviously to each his own. I'm definitely not trying to be negative towards anyone who wants a huge flash drive as there has to be a good reason why and I'm just trying to figure it out.
Update: I'll admit that having a larger drive in your iPhone, computer or whatever is always better as the more info you can fit on it the better, but I guess I just didn't understand the thought process in holding out to buy one simply for that reason since it's so easy to work around not having your entire library with you at all times. Again you can't listen to it or watch it all at the same time.
Four reasons:
1. I travel a lot and sometimes I will be months away from my computer.
2. I really like Genius but when I use it with my 8 GB iPod Touch it is terrible. It very rarely returns any results at all.
3. It's a great backup. You can't ever have too many backups.
4. I already have a Touch so I have the most of the features already (except for the phone which I have separately). So if I am to upgrade to an iPhone, I want it to be something that meets my needs better than my existing player and phone. I don't buy new products for incremental updates - if there are changes, I want them to be easily noticeable.
Well, getting back to the article, if the new 2009 iPhone chipset supports greatly improved graphics, just what could be the results?
- screen resolution upgraded from 480x320 163 ppi to 720x480 x ppi? Good chance. Great for games and watching on line video.
- camera upgraded to x megapixels with much faster exposure and reduced latency? Very good chance. Great for snapshot fans.
- video recording at full 640/720x480p 29fps very good quality? Good chance. convert to H264 file on the fly? cat's meow! export directly to iMovie just like photos do to iPhoto? now we're talking ...
this would keep the iPhone up to speed with the competition. its poor camera and no video recording are right now its most glaring weak spots competitively - especially in Asian markets.
I would like a higher-red display, but I think that 720x480 is to much growth for Apple in one revision. And I'm assuming that their are plenty if Apple and 3rd-party apps that need to fixed to work properly. However, Apple may jump to a significantly higher-res display despite the extra processing and battery drain if it plans on using it for several years in the lineup. BTW, using the same screen size, that would be 247ppi, which may be too much for one jump.
I think video may be coming as if looks like the HW will finally be able to handle it, but I have doubts about a much better camera. Apple likes thin and I don't know of any new tech that would allow them to get a dramatically better camera in that small space.
Any recording should be H.264 directly and import into iPhoto when syncing and allow for WiFi uploads onto MM, YouTube et al.
Apple usually only changes small things. Last time they didn't even change most of the internals. This is good from an R&D and cost standpoint, but there weren't many smartphones focused on multimedia with large internal storage and touchscreen. I think Apple will remain a leader but I think Apple will have to push harder than it did the previous year to make the iPhone stand out.
"Various clues on the next version of the iPhone are being collected that point to a major architectural overhaul that could bring dramatically improved graphics performance to Apple's popular smartphone."
Major architectural overhaul? The ARM CPU will probably be upgraded to one using the Cortex-A8 core or even just a faster ARM11, and the PowerVR MBX graphics to the SGX, but I'm not sure I'd characterize it as a "major overhaul"... Maybe thats just me...
In comparison to last year's whooping inclusion if 3G radios I'd say that any CPU/GPU change could be considered major.
Out of curiosity... why does one need that much space on a phone? I'm not trying to be rude either just a straight up question.
The number one thing is that iPhone isn't really a phone but rather a small computer. If you think of the device as a phone then all hope of understanding the rest of us is gone.
Quote:
On launch day I waited in line for the iPhone 3G and even though I was about 55 people back in line when the doors opened they still ran out of black iPhone 3G's so I thought about it and decided to just get the 8GB then and if I realized I needed more space later on I'd try to return it.
MAn you don't have any idea how much I hate the mentality expressed above. Why not just buy what you need right off the bat instead of saddling the rest of us with the expense of supporting your indecision?
Quote:
Turns out the 8GB model was plenty. I actually never even use more than 6 GB's at a time.
Well that tells me right there you have a device that is to small.
Quote:
I mean how much music can you listen to at one time? I mean even if you listened to music 24 hours a day I could still do that without a problem on my 8GB model. Plus, each time I get home I'm syncing/charging it and can easily swap playlists in two seconds etc. Same goes for movies. I mean I'll usually load it with an iTunes movie rental or other movie I have prior to flying or if I know I'm going to be waiting a long time somewhere.
Playing music is just one thing this small computer can do.
Quote:
I understand at some point the amount of flash drive space is too small, but based on the current compression sizes of most multi-media I'm not sure why someone really needs that large of a flash drive. Obviously to each his own. I'm definitely not trying to be negative towards anyone who wants a huge flash drive as there has to be a good reason why and I'm just trying to figure it out.
Your problem isn't negativity towards the rest of us but rather a narrow view of what that hand held device is capable of. You see an MP3 player with a cell phone attached. I see a hand held computer that has a huge number of uses.
Quote:
Update: I'll admit that having a larger drive in your iPhone, computer or whatever is always better as the more info you can fit on it the better, but I guess I just didn't understand the thought process in holding out to buy one simply for that reason since it's so easy to work around not having your entire library with you at all times. Again you can't listen to it or watch it all at the same time.
See all the answers above. Your problem is comprehension of what other do with iPhone, you need to work away from that mentality of its an MP3 player and I don't understand. You have to put in a little effort, which you seem reluctant to do, to understand the devices almost unlimited capability.
No it's not just you. They're incremental upgrades. There is no reason to make big changes, it's not like there is some fundamental weakness that needs to be addressed. They will probably fine tune their hardware, integrating and rationalising it along with addressing any requirements in the new software.
The lack of use multitasking is a fundamental weakness. Related to that is the lack of RAM space for user apps. That is two things real quick off the top of the head. It is not difficult to add to the list with things like battery life and such.
Anyway you look at it the current iPhone is just a rev one product. It has all sorts of issues that need to be addressed, some of them fundamental as you say.
Quote:
There may be some new features and incrementally better performance, but they're not going to change it into some multi-core speed demon. Priority number one is battery performance.
Honestly I expect the current form factor iPhone to get a modest boost in speed and capability. But I also expect a speed demon for those that need it.
As to multi-core that is not as far fetched as you might think. Depending on who you talk to it has been estimated that there are 4 to 6 ARM cores in the device now. Of course these are embedded in the different support chips and stuff in the device and not in any way usable by the OS for user apps. What a multi-core speed demon chip offers Apple is the ability to replace some of those external processors with much higher performance processors that also can execute user code. This might not mean as clean a speed up in operations as you might expect from going dual core or more but it makes for a tremendously more versatile machine. The reality is those processors have to run some extra system code but that is not always a significant load. So you get more CPU resources for a mix of user code.
[QUOTE=bryanhauer;1370092]Out of curiosity... why does one need that much space on a phone? I'm not trying to be rude either just a straight up question. On launch day I waited in line for the iPhone 3G and even though I was about 55 people back in line when the doors opened they still ran out of black iPhone 3G's so I thought about it and decided to just get the 8GB then and if I realized I needed more space later on I'd try to return it.
- Because they are using it for something OTHER then a phone.
I hope Apple comes out with a Phone version of iPhone, for those of us, who just want a phone.
It will be cheaper and work just fine for CALLING folks, when we need to make a PHONE call.
I like many others have an iPod or 2, I have a very nice digital camera I bring everywhere, I have a nice 17" PowerBook, a GPS in my car, and I don't play games ? so let's have a Apple Phone please.
Hey what's the worst that can happen? I use someone else's iPhone, and like a feature or 2, I then UPGRADE. That seems like a win-win for Apple / AT&T. They sold me a nice PHONE and now I purchase a better iPhone, but all I went is the choice to do just that.
An Apple nanoPhone, nPhone, iPhone jr., little iPhone, iphone shuffle (hell I don't care what they call it) for $99.00 with no subsidies to AT&T, NO hidden costs or contracts, just a nice small working PHONE. We ALL know this would sell like hot cakes.
I think camera and video improvements could improve the halo effect that might cross-sell PC/iPhone owners over to the Mac. We think of a Mac as being the place to create great content - so the iPhone is a weak link in having such weak photo/video capture.
Future iPhone owners should feel that they are capturing great content with their iPhone, and thinking about all the great things they could do with iLife if only they switched to a Mac.
I know someone who is developing a cinema depth of field and field of view app for the iPhone.
His app has been delayed for months. The primary problem that his app is pretty hefty and uses up all of available memory which causes crashing. So he has been working to make it extremely memory efficient.
He's said the primary problem is that the phone app, SMS, and email are always running in the background taking up memory. Their just isn't any memory left over for extra background processing.
One would wonder:
Why then, don't they let background processes run on the touch?
I really think this is unnecessary. The screen is small enough that no-one would pick if the resolution was finer. 480x320 on the iPhone is like a 35" plasma at 5000x3000 dpi.
It would be great if the iPhone could output HD 720p direct to a TV. Perhaps it could be a backdoor to an AppleTV - just plug your iPhone into a dock (on the TV) for online rentals. Not over 3G of course
way cool, now that would be a major differentiating ability of the iphone pushing it as the best new platform.
In many cases background processes don't actually need to be running in the background (and be draining the battery).
What is often enough is to merely suspend them, pausing them until the user comes back to them.
Many of the examples that Palm was showing on its Pre were mere suspension, e.g. while in an email software going to the address book to look someone up and then go back to the emailer. That emailer doesn't need to be using any CPU cycles or battery life while the user is in the address book application.
Yet it is a matter of memory. Perhaps that's the issue on the iPhone. Paging applications in and out of memory takes time and might annoy the user if it's not done fast enough.
I understand and mostly support Apple's decision not to have processes running in the background on a device that's battery juice sensitive.
Yet I do not understand why they can't simply suspend processes - unless it's a memory issue.
Why then, don't they let background processes run on the touch?
It's not storage memory but Ram. They both have 128MB Ram and I think they don't use virtual memory or it uses it in a way that still doesn't allow you to exceed 128MB.
The problem is understandable because the devices run a variant of OS X, which wasn't originally meant for mobile use and runs terribly on desktops with less than 512MB. They split the development a while back but they probably still need to work out some of the desktop bloat that the mobile end doesn't need.
It still doesn't prevent copy/paste though because that process would need a few k of Ram and even if the buffer needed more, they could use the flash drive for that.
If the next incarnation of the iphone had 256MB - 512MB Ram it would help a great deal to get multi-tasking apps but I think they really just need to optimize the apps and OS better. For a mobile device, 128MB Ram should be plenty. If the next iphone OS (v3) has Snow leopard improvements, maybe it will reduce application and OS memory footprint.
Comments
- screen resolution upgraded from 480x320 163 ppi to 720x480 x ppi? Good chance. Great for games and watching on line video.
I really think this is unnecessary. The screen is small enough that no-one would pick if the resolution was finer. 480x320 on the iPhone is like a 35" plasma at 5000x3000 dpi.
It would be great if the iPhone could output HD 720p direct to a TV. Perhaps it could be a backdoor to an AppleTV - just plug your iPhone into a dock (on the TV) for online rentals. Not over 3G of course
"Various clues on the next version of the iPhone are being collected that point to a major architectural overhaul that could bring dramatically improved graphics performance to Apple's popular smartphone."
Major architectural overhaul? The ARM CPU will probably be upgraded to one using the Cortex-A8 core or even just a faster ARM11, and the PowerVR MBX graphics to the SGX, but I'm not sure I'd characterize it as a "major overhaul"... Maybe thats just me...
No it's not just you. They're incremental upgrades. There is no reason to make big changes, it's not like there is some fundamental weakness that needs to be addressed. They will probably fine tune their hardware, integrating and rationalising it along with addressing any requirements in the new software.
There may be some new features and incrementally better performance, but they're not going to change it into some multi-core speed demon. Priority number one is battery performance.
When a much better iPhone arrives, the current low end one can become a "Nano-iPhone" with a nice price reduction!
otherwise I replace my aging phone with a low end Nokia, then I at least will get featers new to me at least such as a color screen, camera, bluetooth and...
The new Nokia 6700c looks nice, but you'll have to wait until Q3 for that one.
-Camera : Apple will probably add video capture and increase the resolution. Maybe a flash also ?
And add/upgrade some components :
-An integrated compass, in order to be able to support true navigation software
-A more powerful processor & graphic chip, in order to compete with other mobile gaming platforms (the sales on AppStore show that the Iphone is largely used as a gaming platform, which may have surprised Apple). Could also allow to display on a TV with a better resolution.
-"System on a Chip" in order to lower the manufacturing price
- More storage capacity : 32 GB, and probably more RAM
Software is independent but the release of the new Iphone could be a good opportunity to release Iphone OS 3.0, with of course support of the new hardware but also improvements for the current generation of Iphones (probably search & sort functions for e-mails, cut & paste, ...)
Out of curiosity... why does one need that much space on a phone? I'm not trying to be rude either just a straight up question. On launch day I waited in line for the iPhone 3G and even though I was about 55 people back in line when the doors opened they still ran out of black iPhone 3G's so I thought about it and decided to just get the 8GB then and if I realized I needed more space later on I'd try to return it.
Turns out the 8GB model was plenty. I actually never even use more than 6 GB's at a time. I mean how much music can you listen to at one time? I mean even if you listened to music 24 hours a day I could still do that without a problem on my 8GB model. Plus, each time I get home I'm syncing/charging it and can easily swap playlists in two seconds etc. Same goes for movies. I mean I'll usually load it with an iTunes movie rental or other movie I have prior to flying or if I know I'm going to be waiting a long time somewhere.
I understand at some point the amount of flash drive space is too small, but based on the current compression sizes of most multi-media I'm not sure why someone really needs that large of a flash drive. Obviously to each his own. I'm definitely not trying to be negative towards anyone who wants a huge flash drive as there has to be a good reason why and I'm just trying to figure it out.
Update: I'll admit that having a larger drive in your iPhone, computer or whatever is always better as the more info you can fit on it the better, but I guess I just didn't understand the thought process in holding out to buy one simply for that reason since it's so easy to work around not having your entire library with you at all times. Again you can't listen to it or watch it all at the same time.
Four reasons:
1. I travel a lot and sometimes I will be months away from my computer.
2. I really like Genius but when I use it with my 8 GB iPod Touch it is terrible. It very rarely returns any results at all.
3. It's a great backup. You can't ever have too many backups.
4. I already have a Touch so I have the most of the features already (except for the phone which I have separately). So if I am to upgrade to an iPhone, I want it to be something that meets my needs better than my existing player and phone. I don't buy new products for incremental updates - if there are changes, I want them to be easily noticeable.
Well, getting back to the article, if the new 2009 iPhone chipset supports greatly improved graphics, just what could be the results?
- screen resolution upgraded from 480x320 163 ppi to 720x480 x ppi? Good chance. Great for games and watching on line video.
- camera upgraded to x megapixels with much faster exposure and reduced latency? Very good chance. Great for snapshot fans.
- video recording at full 640/720x480p 29fps very good quality? Good chance. convert to H264 file on the fly? cat's meow! export directly to iMovie just like photos do to iPhoto? now we're talking ...
this would keep the iPhone up to speed with the competition. its poor camera and no video recording are right now its most glaring weak spots competitively - especially in Asian markets.
I would like a higher-red display, but I think that 720x480 is to much growth for Apple in one revision. And I'm assuming that their are plenty if Apple and 3rd-party apps that need to fixed to work properly. However, Apple may jump to a significantly higher-res display despite the extra processing and battery drain if it plans on using it for several years in the lineup. BTW, using the same screen size, that would be 247ppi, which may be too much for one jump.
I think video may be coming as if looks like the HW will finally be able to handle it, but I have doubts about a much better camera. Apple likes thin and I don't know of any new tech that would allow them to get a dramatically better camera in that small space.
Any recording should be H.264 directly and import into iPhoto when syncing and allow for WiFi uploads onto MM, YouTube et al.
Apple usually only changes small things. Last time they didn't even change most of the internals. This is good from an R&D and cost standpoint, but there weren't many smartphones focused on multimedia with large internal storage and touchscreen. I think Apple will remain a leader but I think Apple will have to push harder than it did the previous year to make the iPhone stand out.
"Various clues on the next version of the iPhone are being collected that point to a major architectural overhaul that could bring dramatically improved graphics performance to Apple's popular smartphone."
Major architectural overhaul? The ARM CPU will probably be upgraded to one using the Cortex-A8 core or even just a faster ARM11, and the PowerVR MBX graphics to the SGX, but I'm not sure I'd characterize it as a "major overhaul"... Maybe thats just me...
In comparison to last year's whooping inclusion if 3G radios I'd say that any CPU/GPU change could be considered major.
Out of curiosity... why does one need that much space on a phone? I'm not trying to be rude either just a straight up question.
The number one thing is that iPhone isn't really a phone but rather a small computer. If you think of the device as a phone then all hope of understanding the rest of us is gone.
On launch day I waited in line for the iPhone 3G and even though I was about 55 people back in line when the doors opened they still ran out of black iPhone 3G's so I thought about it and decided to just get the 8GB then and if I realized I needed more space later on I'd try to return it.
MAn you don't have any idea how much I hate the mentality expressed above. Why not just buy what you need right off the bat instead of saddling the rest of us with the expense of supporting your indecision?
Turns out the 8GB model was plenty. I actually never even use more than 6 GB's at a time.
Well that tells me right there you have a device that is to small.
I mean how much music can you listen to at one time? I mean even if you listened to music 24 hours a day I could still do that without a problem on my 8GB model. Plus, each time I get home I'm syncing/charging it and can easily swap playlists in two seconds etc. Same goes for movies. I mean I'll usually load it with an iTunes movie rental or other movie I have prior to flying or if I know I'm going to be waiting a long time somewhere.
Playing music is just one thing this small computer can do.
I understand at some point the amount of flash drive space is too small, but based on the current compression sizes of most multi-media I'm not sure why someone really needs that large of a flash drive. Obviously to each his own. I'm definitely not trying to be negative towards anyone who wants a huge flash drive as there has to be a good reason why and I'm just trying to figure it out.
Your problem isn't negativity towards the rest of us but rather a narrow view of what that hand held device is capable of. You see an MP3 player with a cell phone attached. I see a hand held computer that has a huge number of uses.
Update: I'll admit that having a larger drive in your iPhone, computer or whatever is always better as the more info you can fit on it the better, but I guess I just didn't understand the thought process in holding out to buy one simply for that reason since it's so easy to work around not having your entire library with you at all times. Again you can't listen to it or watch it all at the same time.
See all the answers above. Your problem is comprehension of what other do with iPhone, you need to work away from that mentality of its an MP3 player and I don't understand. You have to put in a little effort, which you seem reluctant to do, to understand the devices almost unlimited capability.
Dave
No it's not just you. They're incremental upgrades. There is no reason to make big changes, it's not like there is some fundamental weakness that needs to be addressed. They will probably fine tune their hardware, integrating and rationalising it along with addressing any requirements in the new software.
The lack of use multitasking is a fundamental weakness. Related to that is the lack of RAM space for user apps. That is two things real quick off the top of the head. It is not difficult to add to the list with things like battery life and such.
Anyway you look at it the current iPhone is just a rev one product. It has all sorts of issues that need to be addressed, some of them fundamental as you say.
There may be some new features and incrementally better performance, but they're not going to change it into some multi-core speed demon. Priority number one is battery performance.
Honestly I expect the current form factor iPhone to get a modest boost in speed and capability. But I also expect a speed demon for those that need it.
As to multi-core that is not as far fetched as you might think. Depending on who you talk to it has been estimated that there are 4 to 6 ARM cores in the device now. Of course these are embedded in the different support chips and stuff in the device and not in any way usable by the OS for user apps. What a multi-core speed demon chip offers Apple is the ability to replace some of those external processors with much higher performance processors that also can execute user code. This might not mean as clean a speed up in operations as you might expect from going dual core or more but it makes for a tremendously more versatile machine. The reality is those processors have to run some extra system code but that is not always a significant load. So you get more CPU resources for a mix of user code.
Dave
- Because they are using it for something OTHER then a phone.
I hope Apple comes out with a Phone version of iPhone, for those of us, who just want a phone.
It will be cheaper and work just fine for CALLING folks, when we need to make a PHONE call.
I like many others have an iPod or 2, I have a very nice digital camera I bring everywhere, I have a nice 17" PowerBook, a GPS in my car, and I don't play games ? so let's have a Apple Phone please.
Hey what's the worst that can happen? I use someone else's iPhone, and like a feature or 2, I then UPGRADE. That seems like a win-win for Apple / AT&T. They sold me a nice PHONE and now I purchase a better iPhone, but all I went is the choice to do just that.
An Apple nanoPhone, nPhone, iPhone jr., little iPhone, iphone shuffle (hell I don't care what they call it) for $99.00 with no subsidies to AT&T, NO hidden costs or contracts, just a nice small working PHONE. We ALL know this would sell like hot cakes.
Skip
Future iPhone owners should feel that they are capturing great content with their iPhone, and thinking about all the great things they could do with iLife if only they switched to a Mac.
I know someone who is developing a cinema depth of field and field of view app for the iPhone.
His app has been delayed for months. The primary problem that his app is pretty hefty and uses up all of available memory which causes crashing. So he has been working to make it extremely memory efficient.
He's said the primary problem is that the phone app, SMS, and email are always running in the background taking up memory. Their just isn't any memory left over for extra background processing.
One would wonder:
Why then, don't they let background processes run on the touch?
I really think this is unnecessary. The screen is small enough that no-one would pick if the resolution was finer. 480x320 on the iPhone is like a 35" plasma at 5000x3000 dpi.
It would be great if the iPhone could output HD 720p direct to a TV. Perhaps it could be a backdoor to an AppleTV - just plug your iPhone into a dock (on the TV) for online rentals. Not over 3G of course
way cool, now that would be a major differentiating ability of the iphone pushing it as the best new platform.
I'm starting to hope that the iPhone *never* gets copy and paste just to spite the churlish pedants who are whining about it all the time.
Three or four years ago it was gaps between album tracks on the iPod!
One would wonder:
Why then, don't they let background processes run on the touch?
2. I really like Genius but when I use it with my 8 GB iPod Touch it is terrible. It very rarely returns any results at all.
What is often enough is to merely suspend them, pausing them until the user comes back to them.
Many of the examples that Palm was showing on its Pre were mere suspension, e.g. while in an email software going to the address book to look someone up and then go back to the emailer. That emailer doesn't need to be using any CPU cycles or battery life while the user is in the address book application.
Yet it is a matter of memory. Perhaps that's the issue on the iPhone. Paging applications in and out of memory takes time and might annoy the user if it's not done fast enough.
I understand and mostly support Apple's decision not to have processes running in the background on a device that's battery juice sensitive.
Yet I do not understand why they can't simply suspend processes - unless it's a memory issue.
One would wonder:
Why then, don't they let background processes run on the touch?
It's not storage memory but Ram. They both have 128MB Ram and I think they don't use virtual memory or it uses it in a way that still doesn't allow you to exceed 128MB.
The problem is understandable because the devices run a variant of OS X, which wasn't originally meant for mobile use and runs terribly on desktops with less than 512MB. They split the development a while back but they probably still need to work out some of the desktop bloat that the mobile end doesn't need.
It still doesn't prevent copy/paste though because that process would need a few k of Ram and even if the buffer needed more, they could use the flash drive for that.
If the next incarnation of the iphone had 256MB - 512MB Ram it would help a great deal to get multi-tasking apps but I think they really just need to optimize the apps and OS better. For a mobile device, 128MB Ram should be plenty. If the next iphone OS (v3) has Snow leopard improvements, maybe it will reduce application and OS memory footprint.