Other platforms that do support the launching of multiple apps, including Android and Windows Mobile, require users to manually manage system resources and kill off performance robbing background tasks.
I can't speak for Windows Mobile, but Android manages system resources great. If a new application needs memory, it smartly kills off ones that are unneeded. Applications idly sitting in memory aren't "performance robbing" and don't use any CPU so they aren't battery-killers either. In fact, it improves performance AND battery life, because if you switch to them again, they aren't relaunched.
Task killers are mostly unnecessary in the Android environment. The main users are those who see a task managers near the top of the Market and therefore think it's necessary. Of course, sometimes you want to make sure an application has a lot of memory to begin with, so in that case a task manager can be useful - just like how you're going to quit all your other apps before you run Logic on your Mac.
Also FTA:
Quote:
Other platform vendors do not mandate rigid security for their software libraries, with Android permissively allowing users to install apps from any source, something that will likely serve as a welcome mat for malicious hackers once that platform gains enough visibility.
This is just terrible journalism. Mac OS X allows users to install apps from any source. Are you saying Apple should control what I can install on my MBP? If no, then how is my phone different? Anyone who advocates for a closed-ecosystem app store is either an Apple shareholder/sheep or an idiot.
I find it truly reprehensible how people will defend such gatekeeping and obstruction (the very thing Apple was against with the whole "Think Different" campaign) using company-line justifications. Apple isn't looking out for you by not letting you install/run 3rd party apps; they're looking out for their bottom line.
Other platforms that do support the launching of multiple apps, including Android and Windows Mobile, require users to manually manage system resources and kill off performance robbing background tasks.
False. Android takes care of background applications automatically.
Quote:
Google provides no standard mechanism for system-wide push on Android
False. And so laughably incorrect it's pretty ridiculous.
Quote:
The rest of the industry will end up so far behind Apple.
Agreed. Android is definitely so far behind Apple by implementing multitasking from Day 1 years ago, compared to Apple's (rumored) implementation still months away. (Wait what?)
I just love all the little subtle jabs at the other platforms.
Classic!
I love all the un-subtle and over-the-top rants about Apple and its devices. There's nothing so refreshing and amusing as an unclued cynical pedant slamming on the obvious while demanding the ridiculous. Kind of the same experience you get while standing in the rain at a busy intersection with a handful of unemployed circus clowns. Yeah THAT kind of refreshing and amusing.
Imagine "quitting" your mail app. What would that even mean? Why would you want to do that? How would you do it?
Or what if you want to "quit" mail but keep getting pushes, and then only see your other "open" apps. Isn't this just the same as making a new custom page on the home screen?
This is just terrible journalism. Mac OS X allows users to install apps from any source. Are you saying Apple should control what I can install on my MBP? If no, then how is my phone different? Anyone who advocates for a closed-ecosystem app store is either an Apple shareholder/sheep or an idiot.
I find it truly reprehensible how people will defend such gatekeeping and obstruction (the very thing Apple was against with the whole "Think Different" campaign) using company-line justifications. Apple isn't looking out for you by not letting you install/run 3rd party apps; they're looking out for their bottom line.
I don't get it either. Often, the defenders of the App store point to Windows to show is why the gatekeeper function is necessary, while OS X hasn't needed it and is relatively safe.
I have no doubt, that Apple will have a great UI for for MultiTasking-- CoverFlow would be an interesting implementation.
As others have posted, how it works is very important.
Is it:
1) Just a task switcher where all the running apps (and their data) reside in RAM
2) Is it a standard Paged environment where app memory is paged out based on dirty and LRU determinations
3) Will apps be packaged/loaded differently to minimize dirty pages
4) Will APIs be available to aid the developer to save/refresh state
A task switcher only, would, likely, limit the size and number of apps and increase the need for more physical RAM (cost/size/power and other tradeoffs)
A standard paged environment would mean a lot more reads/writes to the SSD. This would affect app performance.
Early SSDs had a limit to the maximum number of writes that could made over the life of the SSD. If that is still the case, then a standard paging implement could reduce the useful life of the device.
I find it truly reprehensible how people will defend such gatekeeping and obstruction (the very thing Apple was against with the whole "Think Different" campaign) using company-line justifications. Apple isn't looking out for you by not letting you install/run 3rd party apps; they're looking out for their bottom line.
Preemptive PR spin. The bad press that would result from dead batteries at noon would probably be irrecoverable and much worse than the minor bad press of no multi-tasking...yet - with coming soon AI articles weekly.
I doubt if Apple will simply throw the doors wide open to 3rd party app background processing. Most likely developers will have to justify to Apple the need for their app to run in the background and convince Apple that they are doing it efficiently and not putting an excessive load on the processor.
I'd be very surprised if we see this until a month or two after the iPad launch, at the earliest. While background processing is a significant enhancement, its absence is not likely to be a deal-breaker for early iPad adopters. Introducing a major operating system enhancement at the same time as a major new piece of hardware offers too many opportunities for things to go wrong. If there are problems with 3rd party background processing, Apple would not want them to rub off on the iPad.
I would, personally, like to see the "File Upload" control in HTML work on the iPhone/iPodTouch/iPad version of Safari.
With the addition of App storage, and apparently storage sharing, there is no real reason to not support it. Plus, it could bring up an option to "Take a Picture" or "Choose from Gallery" and use the resulting image as the file to upload.
I can't speak for Windows Mobile, but Android manages system resources great. If a new application needs memory, it smartly kills off ones that are unneeded.
So that's 1 vote for it working well. As opposed to about 200 votes I've read for it being terrible.
What's unclear to me is whether or not background apps will still be required to poll through the notification manager, or if they'll be allowed to now poll directly.
Apple's mutlitasking must now get patented. Apple's version will be far superior to anyone else's. Just look how Apple redefined cut & paste and MMS. No one does it better than Apple.
"On the iPhone, scaling down several screen views to fit into the relatively small display would be problematic, and apps never have multiple windows"
Apps can have multiple windows. See Safari.
But yes, it really should be an app switcher and not provide navigation into individual windows. Personally, I love the way multitasking works with jailbroken iPhones and SBSettings. First, I love SBSettings to begin with and really hope Apple implements something like this, but also I like being able to see my open apps and then swipe quit them whenever I want.
Someone asked what the purpose of quitting Mail.app would be (or others). For apps that currently always run, (Mail, phone, etc...), these could simply be unquittable. With jailbroken iPhones, quitting one of these apps simply relaunches it. This happens with non-jailbroken iPhones from time to time, if Mail.app crashes, it quits and relaunches.
Youtube videos are not intended to be downloaded. I know it can be done, but doing so breaks the Terms of Service. Not having an app to do that is not a valid complaint. Hopefully the iDisk app does improve though.
If a cable TV company prohibited customer use of DVRs, PVRs, and VCRs in their terms of service, they'd be smacked down by the FCC. Content moving to new mediums must not create a pretext for reducing the rights consumers have.
Comments
Other platforms that do support the launching of multiple apps, including Android and Windows Mobile, require users to manually manage system resources and kill off performance robbing background tasks.
I can't speak for Windows Mobile, but Android manages system resources great. If a new application needs memory, it smartly kills off ones that are unneeded. Applications idly sitting in memory aren't "performance robbing" and don't use any CPU so they aren't battery-killers either. In fact, it improves performance AND battery life, because if you switch to them again, they aren't relaunched.
Task killers are mostly unnecessary in the Android environment. The main users are those who see a task managers near the top of the Market and therefore think it's necessary. Of course, sometimes you want to make sure an application has a lot of memory to begin with, so in that case a task manager can be useful - just like how you're going to quit all your other apps before you run Logic on your Mac.
Also FTA:
Other platform vendors do not mandate rigid security for their software libraries, with Android permissively allowing users to install apps from any source, something that will likely serve as a welcome mat for malicious hackers once that platform gains enough visibility.
This is just terrible journalism. Mac OS X allows users to install apps from any source. Are you saying Apple should control what I can install on my MBP? If no, then how is my phone different? Anyone who advocates for a closed-ecosystem app store is either an Apple shareholder/sheep or an idiot.
I find it truly reprehensible how people will defend such gatekeeping and obstruction (the very thing Apple was against with the whole "Think Different" campaign) using company-line justifications. Apple isn't looking out for you by not letting you install/run 3rd party apps; they're looking out for their bottom line.
"Glad to see Apple is finally catching up to the competition." Android has had this feature for decades...
Does Android still does not have a built-in method to kill an app?
What's Flash?
I hope iPhone will have flash, so I can take pictures in dark places.
Other platforms that do support the launching of multiple apps, including Android and Windows Mobile, require users to manually manage system resources and kill off performance robbing background tasks.
False. Android takes care of background applications automatically.
Google provides no standard mechanism for system-wide push on Android
False. And so laughably incorrect it's pretty ridiculous.
The rest of the industry will end up so far behind Apple.
Agreed. Android is definitely so far behind Apple by implementing multitasking from Day 1 years ago, compared to Apple's (rumored) implementation still months away. (Wait what?)
Nice one.
I just love all the little subtle jabs at the other platforms.
Classic!
I love all the un-subtle and over-the-top rants about Apple and its devices. There's nothing so refreshing and amusing as an unclued cynical pedant slamming on the obvious while demanding the ridiculous. Kind of the same experience you get while standing in the rain at a busy intersection with a handful of unemployed circus clowns. Yeah THAT kind of refreshing and amusing.
Does Android still does not have a built-in method to kill an app?
It does.
Imagine "quitting" your mail app. What would that even mean? Why would you want to do that? How would you do it?
Or what if you want to "quit" mail but keep getting pushes, and then only see your other "open" apps. Isn't this just the same as making a new custom page on the home screen?
This is just terrible journalism. Mac OS X allows users to install apps from any source. Are you saying Apple should control what I can install on my MBP? If no, then how is my phone different? Anyone who advocates for a closed-ecosystem app store is either an Apple shareholder/sheep or an idiot.
I find it truly reprehensible how people will defend such gatekeeping and obstruction (the very thing Apple was against with the whole "Think Different" campaign) using company-line justifications. Apple isn't looking out for you by not letting you install/run 3rd party apps; they're looking out for their bottom line.
I don't get it either. Often, the defenders of the App store point to Windows to show is why the gatekeeper function is necessary, while OS X hasn't needed it and is relatively safe.
As others have posted, how it works is very important.
Is it:
1) Just a task switcher where all the running apps (and their data) reside in RAM
2) Is it a standard Paged environment where app memory is paged out based on dirty and LRU determinations
3) Will apps be packaged/loaded differently to minimize dirty pages
4) Will APIs be available to aid the developer to save/refresh state
A task switcher only, would, likely, limit the size and number of apps and increase the need for more physical RAM (cost/size/power and other tradeoffs)
A standard paged environment would mean a lot more reads/writes to the SSD. This would affect app performance.
Early SSDs had a limit to the maximum number of writes that could made over the life of the SSD. If that is still the case, then a standard paging implement could reduce the useful life of the device.
It will be interesting to learn the answers!
*
I find it truly reprehensible how people will defend such gatekeeping and obstruction (the very thing Apple was against with the whole "Think Different" campaign) using company-line justifications. Apple isn't looking out for you by not letting you install/run 3rd party apps; they're looking out for their bottom line.
Preemptive PR spin. The bad press that would result from dead batteries at noon would probably be irrecoverable and much worse than the minor bad press of no multi-tasking...yet - with coming soon AI articles weekly.
I'd be very surprised if we see this until a month or two after the iPad launch, at the earliest. While background processing is a significant enhancement, its absence is not likely to be a deal-breaker for early iPad adopters. Introducing a major operating system enhancement at the same time as a major new piece of hardware offers too many opportunities for things to go wrong. If there are problems with 3rd party background processing, Apple would not want them to rub off on the iPad.
With the addition of App storage, and apparently storage sharing, there is no real reason to not support it. Plus, it could bring up an option to "Take a Picture" or "Choose from Gallery" and use the resulting image as the file to upload.
I can't speak for Windows Mobile, but Android manages system resources great. If a new application needs memory, it smartly kills off ones that are unneeded.
So that's 1 vote for it working well. As opposed to about 200 votes I've read for it being terrible.
Just hopping off the Pedant Express at Grammar Central to point it out it really should be Exposé. All right all right I'm going.
I can be extra pedantic and argue that Apple's Exposé is incorrect as there's no é character in the English alphabet, only e.
In fairness, Exposé is the trademark for an Apple feature so I guess they can spell it however they want.
But yes, you've stepped out of the wrong side from the Pedant Express - nobody here is going to get confused between Expose and Exposé.
So that's 1 vote for it working well. As opposed to about 200 votes I've read for it being terrible.
Can you provide a link to these votes?
Apps can have multiple windows. See Safari.
But yes, it really should be an app switcher and not provide navigation into individual windows. Personally, I love the way multitasking works with jailbroken iPhones and SBSettings. First, I love SBSettings to begin with and really hope Apple implements something like this, but also I like being able to see my open apps and then swipe quit them whenever I want.
Someone asked what the purpose of quitting Mail.app would be (or others). For apps that currently always run, (Mail, phone, etc...), these could simply be unquittable. With jailbroken iPhones, quitting one of these apps simply relaunches it. This happens with non-jailbroken iPhones from time to time, if Mail.app crashes, it quits and relaunches.
Youtube videos are not intended to be downloaded. I know it can be done, but doing so breaks the Terms of Service. Not having an app to do that is not a valid complaint. Hopefully the iDisk app does improve though.
If a cable TV company prohibited customer use of DVRs, PVRs, and VCRs in their terms of service, they'd be smacked down by the FCC. Content moving to new mediums must not create a pretext for reducing the rights consumers have.