… No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". ...
I appreciate the clarification of terms but the above bit is just nonsense. Everything else seems logical and sensible, but this statement just reeks of "made it up for this post"-ness.
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
I appreciate the clarification of terms but the above bit is just nonsense. Everything else seems logical and sensible, but this statement just reeks of "made it up for this post"-ness.
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
Of course it's made up nonsense. That's his point. Some anti-Apple people drew an arbitrary line in an attempt to paint iOS as inferior.
… No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". ...
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
There is a difference. On iOS you would not see an error like this. From some perspectives iOS is perhaps a better multitaking OS than OS X because it would suspend a background task to avoid low memory situations where OS X will give an error message or an app may just crash when low on memory.
Gingerbread is great and fits the bill nicely for the low end market. Some areas of the world are very price sensitive and they just want a phone that can make calls, text/email, and browse the web. Basic, but cheap. Gingerbread lets vendors make phones with very low hardware specs.
It would be very hard for any phone running ICS or later, or iOS6 or later to compete on price with a bare bones Gingerbread phone.
That's not a market Apple has gone after and that's fine too.
Developers making Apps to market and sell are far more interested in their actual market- which is pretty much the Play store.
Fragmentation is a minor problem for users- but there really is no shortage of great apps on any version of Android.
Its a nuisance for developers, but self correcting as updates are becoming more feature iterations than 'all new' API's.
It is a major problem for Apple fans, because it gives them something to post about
I actually find Apples version of fragmentation more confusing as a user. Google could just issue an 'update' that tells any Gingerbread phone or ICS phone that it is now running 'Jellybean!' and update the software number. TaDa! Fragmentation is fixed! Of course the phones themselves couldn't use any of the features in Jellybean or that they don't have the hardware for. That's a little the boat Apple puts its users in. A 3gs owner or iPhone 4 owner will get 'upgraded' to iOS 6. Their phone will run slower, burn through the battery faster, and they won't actually be able to use the most significant features of their unfragmented OS (Siri, Flyovers, LTE, turn-by-turn navigation etc etc). If they click on their OS version though, they will happily see they are indeed running iOS6 and part of the 82% that isn't 'fragmented' With android you at least know which features are and aren't available by software version. Either way the problem comes down to if you are running a two or three year old phone- it is not going to be able to do everything the newer phones can do.
If you know you don't need to splice 83827271 pictures together, don't need a nifty personal assistant, and don't need anything more than browser- its nice to have an OS that has more DOS-like system requirements than a Crysis capable phone. Gingerbread actually gives Android a competitive edge in the low end markets. Apple would have a hard time making a bargain iOS7 capable phone if they do indeed choose to go after the lower end markets (which is another topic of speculation entirely).
… No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". ...
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
There is a difference. On iOS you would not see an error like this. From some perspectives iOS is perhaps a better multitaking OS than OS X because it would suspend a background task to avoid low memory situations where OS X will give an error message or an app may just crash when low on memory.
I am away from my Mac and XCode, but I believe both OSX and iOS will notify an app of its pending termination through app delegate callbacks... It allows the app to (possibly) save state, present a dialog and fail gracefully.
With the advent of iOS user multitasking, the app termination callbacks were enhanced and provided additional granularity to allow the terminating app more participation and a more graceful termination. I assume that OSX has has been similarity enhanced.
I suspect that there are quite a few OSX apps that have not been updated to take advantage of the enhanced callbacks...
It wouldn't surprise me if iTunes were one of those apps
There is a difference. On iOS you would not see an error like this. From some perspectives iOS is perhaps a better multitaking OS than OS X because it would suspend a background task to avoid low memory situations where OS X will give an error message or an app may just crash when low on memory.
[image]
It's been needed much less over the decades as virtual memory does it's shell game very well, but I wouldn't be surprised as we move into solid-state drives if Mac OS X adopts creating a saved state of apps. In fact, does it already do that right now since everything is saved as you make changes? Wasn't back in Lion that they even defaulted to not letting you know which apps in the Dock were actually "running"? I still use the blue dots to denote which apps are active but that is probably habit more than need as I have 24GB RAM in my iMac.
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
I just bought an Android phone after being an iPhone user for many years (I still love my iPhone 5). Visit almost any Android forum and you'll see anti-iPhone "bile" there as well. Furthermore, they argue among themselves over whose Android phone model is better. There's enough juvenile behavior to go around for everybody.
The bolded part is not necessarily true and basically a bold assumption on your part. It seems far more likely to me that if a user never accesses the store, that they aren't using the phone as a "smartphone" at all and are thud not using Google's services either.
Maybe. But how many people sync to google, or use gmail but never use the play store? There's also calendar and contacts, etc. Anyway, like I said in another post, activations are mostly a pointless number.
I appreciate the clarification of terms but the above bit is just nonsense. Everything else seems logical and sensible, but this statement just reeks of "made it up for this post"-ness.
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
Sure Windows (for example) can close an App, but it should only close an App if it's misbehaving or not responding (crashed).
In any other case (too many Apps running, low RAM), then lesser used Apps can be swapped out to virtual memory and brought back later when the user requests them. In this case the App will be in the EXACT same state it was since all memory associated with it has been preserved. The App doesn't need to be specially coded to do something (like save state) as it would never be in the position of being forced closed (outside of crashing).
This is the major difference between Windows and Android/iOS. In Android/iOS you could have a perfectly behaving program end up getting closed for no other reason than another program requesting too much memory. To me that's unacceptable for a modern OS.
I appreciate the clarification of terms but the above bit is just nonsense. Everything else seems logical and sensible, but this statement just reeks of "made it up for this post"-ness.
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
Sure Windows (for example) can close an App, but it should only close an App if it's misbehaving or not responding (crashed).
In any other case (too many Apps running, low RAM), then lesser used Apps can be swapped out to virtual memory and brought back later when the user requests them. In this case the App will be in the EXACT same state it was since all memory associated with it has been preserved. The App doesn't need to be specially coded to do something (like save state) as it would never be in the position of being forced closed (outside of crashing).
This is the major difference between Windows and Android/iOS. In Android/iOS you could have a perfectly behaving program end up getting closed for no other reason than another program requesting too much memory. To me that's unacceptable for a modern OS.
Idealistically, I agree with you.
However with a mobile device like a phone you cannot depend on:
A large PDS (Virtual Memory) *
Reliable Power
Large RAM
Large processing power
The time to manage sophisticated multitasking
* Flash Storage is not the best solution for a PDS
So from, a practical standpoint, I do think that it is reasonable for a mobile OS to force close programs while giving them the opportunity to save state.
However with a mobile device like a phone you cannot depend on:
A large PDS (Virtual Memory) *
Reliable Power
Large RAM
* Flash Storage is not the best solution for a PDS
So from, a practical standpoint, I do think that it is reasonable for a mobile OS to force close programs while giving them the opportunity to save state.
As Apple continually moves their innovations between Mac OS X to iOS and vice versa I can't help but wonder if we'll see a more intelligent option for Mac OS X in regards to memory usage, especially as flash-based drives will likely be standard in all Macs soon, even they do have an HDD attached as well.
I wouldn't expect the same limitations as the multi-talking APIs we see with 3rd-party apps in iOS but I could see them leverage the instant one of an app on an SSD with the auto- and instan-save state of the current Mac apps to afford a more efficient way of allowing the system to be faster and more efficient without the user every really knowing anything is going on.
However with a mobile device like a phone you cannot depend on:
A large PDS (Virtual Memory) *
Reliable Power
Large RAM
* Flash Storage is not the best solution for a PDS
So from, a practical standpoint, I do think that it is reasonable for a mobile OS to force close programs while giving them the opportunity to save state.
As Apple continually moves their innovations between Mac OS X to iOS and vice versa I can't help but wonder if we'll see a more intelligent option for Mac OS X in regards to memory usage, especially as flash-based drives will likely be standard in all Macs soon, even they do have an HDD attached as well.
I wouldn't expect the same limitations as the multi-talking APIs we see with 3rd-party apps in iOS but I could see them leverage the instant one of an app on an SSD with the auto- and instan-save state of the current Mac apps to afford a more efficient way of allowing the system to be faster and more efficient without the user every really knowing anything is going on.
I think you are on to something.
One of the great benefits for people who use Final Cut Pro X -- is that you never lose anything. And you never [can] save anything. This is significant when compared to the orior versions of Final Cut -- where you had to save frequently and still could lose a lot of work.
They could enhance something like CoreData and tell the developer that the OS will take responsibility for backup, state, etc. when you use it.
MacRumors has a nicely worded rule on the subject of hoaxes (under which all that would fall) that I feel we should adopt.
Pity they don't actually enforce… any of their rules, eh?
MacRumors is more of a bitch and moan site than anything else. I have never read so many cry baby comments as those on that forum. Unless your an android fan, or just want a good laugh, I wouldn't bother with that site.
They are waiting on apple to release something awesome @WWDC to inspire them.
Bingo - and let's hope that Apple does, particularly given the non-stop beating it has been taking on the market and in the press since it's going to take a toll on sales/growth. The fact that Ive is (apparently) working to bring hardware and software closer together in development is a good sign, anyway.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
… No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". ...
I appreciate the clarification of terms but the above bit is just nonsense. Everything else seems logical and sensible, but this statement just reeks of "made it up for this post"-ness.
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
Of course it's made up nonsense. That's his point. Some anti-Apple people drew an arbitrary line in an attempt to paint iOS as inferior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
… No OS that can force close an App arbitrarily can be considered to offer "true multitasking". ...
By this definition neither Windows nor Mac OS X are "multitasking." I can't even think of an OS that would qualify as multi-tasking at all based on this stipulation. Unix would also be a "non multi-tasking" OS by this definition.
There is a difference. On iOS you would not see an error like this. From some perspectives iOS is perhaps a better multitaking OS than OS X because it would suspend a background task to avoid low memory situations where OS X will give an error message or an app may just crash when low on memory.
Gingerbread is great and fits the bill nicely for the low end market. Some areas of the world are very price sensitive and they just want a phone that can make calls, text/email, and browse the web. Basic, but cheap. Gingerbread lets vendors make phones with very low hardware specs.
It would be very hard for any phone running ICS or later, or iOS6 or later to compete on price with a bare bones Gingerbread phone.
That's not a market Apple has gone after and that's fine too.
Developers making Apps to market and sell are far more interested in their actual market- which is pretty much the Play store.
Fragmentation is a minor problem for users- but there really is no shortage of great apps on any version of Android.
Its a nuisance for developers, but self correcting as updates are becoming more feature iterations than 'all new' API's.
It is a major problem for Apple fans, because it gives them something to post about
I actually find Apples version of fragmentation more confusing as a user. Google could just issue an 'update' that tells any Gingerbread phone or ICS phone that it is now running 'Jellybean!' and update the software number. TaDa! Fragmentation is fixed! Of course the phones themselves couldn't use any of the features in Jellybean or that they don't have the hardware for. That's a little the boat Apple puts its users in. A 3gs owner or iPhone 4 owner will get 'upgraded' to iOS 6. Their phone will run slower, burn through the battery faster, and they won't actually be able to use the most significant features of their unfragmented OS (Siri, Flyovers, LTE, turn-by-turn navigation etc etc). If they click on their OS version though, they will happily see they are indeed running iOS6 and part of the 82% that isn't 'fragmented' With android you at least know which features are and aren't available by software version. Either way the problem comes down to if you are running a two or three year old phone- it is not going to be able to do everything the newer phones can do.
If you know you don't need to splice 83827271 pictures together, don't need a nifty personal assistant, and don't need anything more than browser- its nice to have an OS that has more DOS-like system requirements than a Crysis capable phone. Gingerbread actually gives Android a competitive edge in the low end markets. Apple would have a hard time making a bargain iOS7 capable phone if they do indeed choose to go after the lower end markets (which is another topic of speculation entirely).
I am away from my Mac and XCode, but I believe both OSX and iOS will notify an app of its pending termination through app delegate callbacks... It allows the app to (possibly) save state, present a dialog and fail gracefully.
With the advent of iOS user multitasking, the app termination callbacks were enhanced and provided additional granularity to allow the terminating app more participation and a more graceful termination. I assume that OSX has has been similarity enhanced.
I suspect that there are quite a few OSX apps that have not been updated to take advantage of the enhanced callbacks...
It wouldn't surprise me if iTunes were one of those apps
It's been needed much less over the decades as virtual memory does it's shell game very well, but I wouldn't be surprised as we move into solid-state drives if Mac OS X adopts creating a saved state of apps. In fact, does it already do that right now since everything is saved as you make changes? Wasn't back in Lion that they even defaulted to not letting you know which apps in the Dock were actually "running"? I still use the blue dots to denote which apps are active but that is probably habit more than need as I have 24GB RAM in my iMac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland
That always reminds me of this scene from Me, Myself and Irene... ah classic Jim Carrey.
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
I just bought an Android phone after being an iPhone user for many years (I still love my iPhone 5). Visit almost any Android forum and you'll see anti-iPhone "bile" there as well. Furthermore, they argue among themselves over whose Android phone model is better. There's enough juvenile behavior to go around for everybody.
That photo is cringe worthy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
The bolded part is not necessarily true and basically a bold assumption on your part. It seems far more likely to me that if a user never accesses the store, that they aren't using the phone as a "smartphone" at all and are thud not using Google's services either.
Maybe. But how many people sync to google, or use gmail but never use the play store? There's also calendar and contacts, etc. Anyway, like I said in another post, activations are mostly a pointless number.
In any other case (too many Apps running, low RAM), then lesser used Apps can be swapped out to virtual memory and brought back later when the user requests them. In this case the App will be in the EXACT same state it was since all memory associated with it has been preserved. The App doesn't need to be specially coded to do something (like save state) as it would never be in the position of being forced closed (outside of crashing).
This is the major difference between Windows and Android/iOS. In Android/iOS you could have a perfectly behaving program end up getting closed for no other reason than another program requesting too much memory. To me that's unacceptable for a modern OS.
And the hardware. If Apple decides to create one model phone with both gsm and software switchable CDMA there's nothing the carriers can do about it.
Idealistically, I agree with you.
However with a mobile device like a phone you cannot depend on:
* Flash Storage is not the best solution for a PDS
So from, a practical standpoint, I do think that it is reasonable for a mobile OS to force close programs while giving them the opportunity to save state.
As Apple continually moves their innovations between Mac OS X to iOS and vice versa I can't help but wonder if we'll see a more intelligent option for Mac OS X in regards to memory usage, especially as flash-based drives will likely be standard in all Macs soon, even they do have an HDD attached as well.
I wouldn't expect the same limitations as the multi-talking APIs we see with 3rd-party apps in iOS but I could see them leverage the instant one of an app on an SSD with the auto- and instan-save state of the current Mac apps to afford a more efficient way of allowing the system to be faster and more efficient without the user every really knowing anything is going on.
The app was used by a mover to go on site and gather information.to prepare a bid estimate. The app had 3 databases: customers; items; bids.
Each database was updated by a separate View/View Controller.
It was quite easy to save state whenever a View (that changed the database) was about to be unloaded.
With some simple code it was trivial to save and restore state... Even in the event of an app or system crash.
No big deal... Really!
I think you are on to something.
One of the great benefits for people who use Final Cut Pro X -- is that you never lose anything. And you never [can] save anything. This is significant when compared to the orior versions of Final Cut -- where you had to save frequently and still could lose a lot of work.
They could enhance something like CoreData and tell the developer that the OS will take responsibility for backup, state, etc. when you use it.
Originally Posted by geekdad
Careful...Soli is saying you should be banned....next TS will show up and start deleting your posts....
Originally Posted by geekdad
Really how would you know? Aren't you banned on MacRumors?
I thought you had grown up, or at least gained the intelligence required to hold a logical conversation.
Oh, well.
"Ajar", I like it. Good one!
MacRumors is more of a bitch and moan site than anything else. I have never read so many cry baby comments as those on that forum. Unless your an android fan, or just want a good laugh, I wouldn't bother with that site.
Quote:
Originally Posted by caribbean_mac
They are waiting on apple to release something awesome @WWDC to inspire them.
Bingo - and let's hope that Apple does, particularly given the non-stop beating it has been taking on the market and in the press since it's going to take a toll on sales/growth. The fact that Ive is (apparently) working to bring hardware and software closer together in development is a good sign, anyway.