Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Iphone Privacy

iPhone 4 News Roundup 568

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the here-we-go-again dept.
We have a slew of iPhone 4-related stories this morning, so I'm lumping them together for easier consumption/ignoring, depending on your personal feelings on the subject. Here is a blog entry proclaiming that iOS 4 multitasking sucks and why. Here is a sketchy summary of privacy violations by Apple and AT&T — apparently they are reporting back jailbroken phones. Skunkpost has a story about the lines and sales of the new phone. But the big news of the morning is the reception problems that apparently only affect people who hold the phone in their left hands.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

iPhone 4 News Roundup

Comments Filter:
  • by Pojut (1027544) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @11:53AM (#32678818) Homepage

    Goatse.

    But seriously folks...the new iPhone hardware and many of the additions they are making to the OS are really great...but I'm sorry, I still can't get past the walled garden. Again, I know the app store would have everything I would likely need, but I just can't accept being told that an application would be inappropriate for me to use. And yes, I know I could just jailbreak it...but that's not the point. I don't care that I can get around it, I care that the walled garden exists in the first place. As a consumer, the best I can do is vote with my wallet.

    This is only my opinion, I don't speak for others, YMMV, etc applies.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by dasheiff (261577)

      >But seriously folks...the new iPhone hardware and many of the additions they are making to the OS are really great...but I'm sorry, I still can't get past the walled garden.

      These phones are not for people like you or me. They are for our grandmothers.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Pojut (1027544)

        See, that's the frustrating thing: I really like the hardware, and I find the interface to be fairly intuitive...were it not for locking people into their own store (and were it not for being stuck with AT&T), I would very likely own an iPhone. So long as appstore lock-in and AT&T exclusivity are around though, I won't be a paying customer.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Draek (916851)

        No, the phones for our grandmothers are made by Nokia and come free with your contract.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:15PM (#32679138)

      The App Store is a public marketplace. You don't see people complaining they can't buy the latest pr0n titles at your local BB or Radio Shack.

      It's a phone! It's not the second coming, they're not taking your desktop away, and....chances are they won't try mind-control with it. Personally, I just want my phone to work, so that I can get things done and not troubleshoot why my phone is crashing.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Pojut (1027544)

        The App Store is a public marketplace. You don't see people complaining they can't buy the latest pr0n titles at your local BB or Radio Shack.

        Exactly. They know what they are looking for, so they make their decisions based on a business that provides what they need. I'm doing the same thing.

        It's a phone! It's not the second coming, they're not taking your desktop away, and....chances are they won't try mind-control with it.

        That's why I was calm and honest with my OP, and not some drooling anti-Apple reject.

        Personally, I just want my phone to work, so that I can get things done and not troubleshoot why my phone is crashing.

        ::shrug:: my phone works perfectly fine, as did the Windows Mobile phone I had before it.

        I suppose it's all in the user...

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        The App Store is a public marketplace. You don't see people complaining they can't buy the latest pr0n titles at your local BB or Radio Shack.

        What they do complain about is when they can't buy pr0n titles anywhere in the country because the guy selling computers at Best Buy says he doesn't want them to exist.

    • by bonch (38532) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:24PM (#32679248)

      Life is really too short to be idealistic about freaking phone apps.

      • by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:30PM (#32679372)
        Then why are you posting here about "freaking phone apps" and not outside enjoying life, running through fields, in the company of another human being? We need to be idealistic about some things, and if Apple's insane policies become more accepted by the public then it's only a matter of time before the rest of the industry follows suit.
    • by bennomatic (691188) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:25PM (#32679258) Homepage
      You want my advice? Don't buy an iPhone. Or any number of the other phones that don't offer developer access for users.

      I remember my first Sprint phone, which had a four-note polyphonic midi player built-in, and I was so excited, I started to make my own midi files, but couldn't figure out how to import them. I called their support and they said that it was impossible, that this was special encoded data and all ring tones had to be purchased.

      I called BS on it, and told them that it was all bits, and I should be able to do what I wanted. The support monkey said no.

      A few weeks later, someone leaked the information; turns out you just needed a special HTTP header line to tell the phone that it was a Sprint-sanctioned ring tone, and it would download fine. Once it was published, I wrote a script to allow me to upload a MIDI file to my web site, which would then send a text message with the right URL to access it to my phone, and I would download it. It was awesome.

      A month later, Sprint came out with phones that allowed the user to edit midi files right on the phone itself.

      I guess I'm getting old. I'm sure there was a point in there somewhere. Maybe it's that all of the cell phone vendors and service providers have their own control issues. If you don't like it, as you say, vote with your wallet.
  • by 0xdeadbeef (28836) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @11:55AM (#32678866) Homepage Journal

    The screens have yellow spots [engadget.com]. Apparently these "retina" displays have cataracts.

  • by organgtool (966989) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @11:57AM (#32678898)
    Steve Jobs doesn't care about left handed people. - Kanye
  • by ProdigyPuNk (614140) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:00PM (#32678952) Journal
    Perhaps Apple (and others) need to shift emphasis back towards the actual calling features of their phones. Who wants a phone that drops calls if you hold it wrong ? It's great that it has new software, etcetc, but any phone I would consider buying needs to include basic features like better than average reception, a decent sounding speaker/mic, and most importantly, does not drop calls if you touch it in it's no-no spot.
    • They did (Score:5, Informative)

      by SuperKendall (25149) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:26PM (#32679286)

      The new iPhone actually does address a lot of the calling complaints.

      If you read the engadget review, the metal external antenna really do improve signal and ( for them) eliminated dropped calls.

      The speakers are supposed to be improved for hearing people, and the phone had two microphones now so it can do noise cancelation.

      Basically, they did a lot of things to improve call quality.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dangitman (862676)

      Perhaps Apple (and others) need to shift emphasis back towards the actual calling features of their phones.

      People still make phone calls?

      Who wants a phone that drops calls if you hold it wrong ?

      What's your basis for this accusation? The latest iPhone has just gotten out to consumers. Have you tested its call quality? Perhaps Apple has been paying attention to this area? That would help explain why a prototype was found in the wild.

    • I see it as eliminating one of the biggest disadvantages of carrying a mobile phone. If I don't have reliable inbound / outbound calls then I don't have to make the pretense of answering calls I don't want.
  • by anethema (99553) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:01PM (#32678962) Homepage
    At least almost certainly.

    MuscleNerd, one of the, if not THE foremost Apple device hacker out there has implied he has done code inspection and just through common sense says its all BS.

    There are a few tweets on the matter but this is one of the more telling:

    http://twitter.com/MuscleNerd/status/16876551921
  • by yyxx (1812612) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:01PM (#32678964)

    Apple's restrictions on multitasking make little sense from a technical point of view. From other platforms, we know that is not a major battery drain, and it's perfectly possible for a scheduler to do automatically whatever Apple's special APIs are trying to achieve.

    Unless Apple just doesn't know what they are doing, the real reason behind Apple's restrictions on multitasking is more likely the same as their restrictions on scripting languages and alternative development environments: they want to keep control. With multitasking, you could run local file servers and local web servers. You could create new applications delivery platforms, local music servers, and a local file system and file manager.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by matt_macleod (1158215)
      This is a completely nonsensical argument. Apple already have complete control over applications that are available through the app store and, as such, there's no need for technical limitations to prevent people from running such services in the background. I've seen many people claim that Apple's multitasking "sucks," but I've yet to see any convincing argument as to why it would be implemented in such a way for anything other than the reasons they profess!
      • by yyxx (1812612) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:43PM (#32679588)

        This is a completely nonsensical argument. Apple already have complete control over applications that are available through the app store

        That's an obvious but wrong response. Apple also wouldn't have to declare any explicit prohibitions on scripting languages, they could just turn down applications, but the resulting uncertainty would be bad for developers. Therefore, when Apple doesn't want unrestricted multitasking, they need to communicate and implement that somehow in a way that doesn't create hazards for their developers.

        By defining a specific set of APIs and laying down the rule "no multitasking except through these APIs", Apple gets the restrictions they want, developers get clear rules to follow, and users still get the amount of multitasking Apple is willing to give them. In different words, the existence of these extra APIs codifies business strategy.

        If you have another explanation, let's hear it, but Apple's explanation is nonsense. Whatever technical goals Apple says they want to achieve, they could simply achieve through small modifications to their scheduler, if need be, on a per-application basis, with much less work for themselves and their developers.

    • by beelsebob (529313) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:35PM (#32679474)

      From other platforms, we know that is not a major battery drain

      The people who make those platforms would beg to differ, Larry Page himself said that poor battery life in android is usually down to multitasking.

    • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:38PM (#32679516)

      From other platforms, we know that is not a major battery drain, and it's perfectly possible for a scheduler to do automatically whatever Apple's special APIs are trying to achieve.

      Um, even Google acknowledges that multitasking hurts battery life. [loopinsight.com] As a geek, that's an acceptable tradeoff because you know about it. For the average consumer that can barely distinguish the difference between Li-Poly and Lipitor, all they'll know is that the battery life on their iPhone sucks and Apple is totally to blame.

      With multitasking, you could run local file servers and local web servers. You could create new applications delivery platforms, local music servers, and a local file system and file manager.

      With the iPhone, Apple succeeded in selling a smartphone to consumers by hiding all the complexities of a smartphone like the filesystem and a file manager. And you want to undo all of that? Maybe perhaps Apple didn't design the iPhone for geeks like you.

  • by SuperKendall (25149) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:05PM (#32679030)

    The multitasking complaint seems kind of off to me - he complains about the tray being "cluttered" after you go through a few apps because they are automatically added to the tray. But the tray is just four apps wide - how can you have clutter in only four items? And he complains he needs to press and hold to quit an app - but also complains most apps are just suspended. So then why quit an app? It's not doing anything and will be removed if you are low on memory.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by kimvette (919543)

      But the tray is just four apps wide - how can you have clutter in only four items?

      My iPhone's tray is six icons wide [modmyi.com], you insensitive clod!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mmarlett (520340)

      Yeah, as I was reading the story on my ios4 3GS iPhone, I couldn't figure out what he was talking about. It seems completely made up. Like he got drunk, hacked his own phone and then blacked out only to wake up later all angry and confused. He seems to believe that all apps need multitasking, and the truth is that most really don't. I can only do so much at once.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Darak (1841126)

      The OS is supposed to manage itself the memory consumption and automatically close background apps as needed, with no interaction needed from the user. The tasks tray is simply a history of recent applications: background applications are guaranteed to be there, but this will be also the clase of old applications with no background support. So yes, you can press and hold to remove apps from the list - but you're not supposed or required to do so.

      In my humble opinion, this is a good thing. Many users have en

    • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:49PM (#32679692)

      The article complains that to enable multitasking, developers have to change code. Is that really a serious complaint or is the author complaining just to complain. Things don't automagically happen in everyday life. If multitasking were enabled by default then any and all apps that you open would run continuously in the background. That would use all the memory and the battery. And the phone would eventually crash as it ran out of resources. And how many apps actually to need to run in the background as opposed to merely suspending? Did the author not think about that?

      • by IamTheRealMike (537420) <mike@plan99.net> on Thursday June 24, 2010 @01:04PM (#32679938) Homepage
        Well, on Android all apps support multi-tasking out of the box. And it's not just because it's been there since v1. It's because the framework practically forces you into supporting the suspend/resume model of multi-tasking (though you have the option of "the real thing" if you want it). Android apps are built up out of activities, and each activity suspends its state to what is basically a small file when it leaves the screen and reads back from it when it comes back. To move between screens, you pass the OS another little bundle of data. It's quite an interesting system once you get used to it, though like most of Android it's optional.
        • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @01:30PM (#32680370)
          The default behavior of iPhone apps is that they get suspended them when you are not in the foreground with the exception of the push notifications and phone services. What the author was complaining about was that in order to use any of the advanced multitasking options, developers have change code that tells iOS that the app should have a different behavior than the default. Is that really a serious complaint?
  • by demonbug (309515) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:06PM (#32679034) Journal

    Apparently Apple's testers discovered some new way of using phones that does not include holding it in your hand.

    Also;

    You mean you have to use your hands?
    That's like a baby's toy!

  • by QuatermassX (808146) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:07PM (#32679042) Homepage
    The queue in Hampstead this morning was 23 strong at 6.30 this morning (I was number 23), though by 7.00 it extended fairly far down Hampstead High Street. Mercifully, Samir in his white Apple iPhone 4 t-shirt came around, checked we were O2 customers and fetched everyone tea, coffee and juice from Gail's on the other side of the road. I didn't dare ask for one of Gail's scrumptious cake (had a slice of birthday cake there a few weeks ago and it was heavenly). I wasn't blessed with the Divine Device until a little past nine, but it all went smoothly with nary a cross word. That's a lie, a rather brash young lady sashayed up and attempted to sweet talk the two chaps behind me into allowing her to queue jump. Her lousy manners were challenged by a whingy American-sounding fellow. She then said "what are you going to do about it? Hit me?" She was Spanish and looked for all the world like some demented Almodóvar-esque creation. She had the good sense to eventually leave. So far the iPhone 4 has been brilliant. Fingers crossed the decent reception will last!
  • Not trolling... (Score:5, Informative)

    by rotide (1015173) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:10PM (#32679076)

    Seriously, is anyone else getting tired of the daily Apple story on the iPhone?

    I get it, it's tech that people like, but do we really need daily updates on it? This site tends to be a heavy linux advocate and there is a nice writeup of the EVO 4G on Ars today. Not a peep of that though, MORE APPLE!

  • the long and short of it is that I should just jailbreak my iPhone instead?

  • by strayant (789108) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:21PM (#32679220)
    I would be curious about the conductivity of certain coatings. I personally hate covers for phones, as they add bulk. As a person with nickel allergies, I have to coat belt buckles and the like with acrylic. I wonder if the same would help this antenna. If so, then they could do something similar in the manufacturing process. They do similar coatings for fishing rods that weather well.
  • by KuRa_Scvls (932317) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:26PM (#32679292)

    Reception problem?

    It's a Feature.

    Think about it,

    ANY call you accidentally picked up, but want to drop out of, you now have a CONTROLLED method to do so, instead of doing the fake drop out miming.

    Just hold the phone with your left hand.

    Thank Jobs for this wonderful day we have been blessed with.

  • by dFaust (546790) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:29PM (#32679336)

    Apparently the author who wrote about multitasking hasn't actually tried it out yet, because he's off-base. While the app tray does quickly get cluttered, as he mentions, the lack of true multitasking is exactly why this doesn't matter - you can have as many apps down there as you want but they're not actively consuming resources. Where he's really off is in his implication that it now becomes difficult to find your apps to switch back to them. Look, if I'm playing Peggle and then use 4, or worst case 8, apps after switching out of Peggle - mentally I just won't even think to look in the task tray for it anymore. I just can't keep track of every app I've used in my brain. The tray will quickly let me switch back to my most recently used apps, which is really handy - but when I want to switch back to the middle of my Peggle game a week and 20 other app uses later I... and this will sound crazy... click the Peggle icon wherever it's located on my main screens. The author seems to think that the only way to resume an app is from the task tray, and that's simply not true.

    Granted, I had some uncertainty about how this would work, too. But I grabbed a new iPhone and tried it out to see exactly how it works, rather than hopping on the interwebs and writing up an article with uninformed assumptions which then ended up on the front page of /.

    Additionally, he goes on to say that developers have to explicitly add multitasking. While that's true for using the background services, my understanding (and correct me if I'm wrong folks, as I have this on good authority but haven't actually tried it) is that for the base level of background freezing, which for a majority of apps is all that's really needed, all you have to do is recompile the app against iOS 4. It's not automagic, but it's really not so bad as the author implies. The worst bit about it is submitting to the app store, but it should be pretty painless to get to that point.

    Granted, it's not true multitasking. Everyone knows that by now. But frankly, I'd rather the phone always be responsive and maintain its battery life than have true multitasking for the vast majority of the things that I do and have no desire to have to actively manage my apps (which contrary to the author's claims, I don't have to do). Maybe some day I'll change my mind on that. Maybe right now this level of multitasking isn't good enough for many people out there. And that's cool, we have options now - get one of the many excellent Android phones. But please don't write a blog post of inaccuracies.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      I don't know why it's so confusing on the iPhone. I like the simplicity of multi-tasking on my Droid. The Android OS just handles everything seamlessly.
  • by the.aham (839985) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @12:40PM (#32679558)

    From the TechWorld iOS4 multitasking article [techworld.com] in the summary:

    Waiting for a YouTube video to buffer over a 3G connection? It won't go anywhere unless you're staring at the loading screen.

    Honestly, doesn't this also happen by default with applications on other mobile OS'es like Android, unless the developer specifies otherwise in the app's code?

    From what I understand about the Android application life cycle under normal circumstances, once an Activity (the app's presentation layer, what you interact with) is completely obscured, the application's host process becomes a "background" process. Meaning, the app's Activities aren't visible and there are no Services running, thereby making the app's host process one of the first processes to be killed off so to allocate resources. (Service example: a media player running in the background while you're actively using another app). For an app's host process to remain in an active state, the app must have a running Activity, Service or Broadcast Receiver. In my following the Android dev tutorials, I've seen that only the Activity is absolutely required - Services and Broadcast Receivers are added only when you need them for your app to fulfill it's intended purpose.

    So, in the case of buffering the YouTube video, if I were writing an Android app to do just that, I'd have to have explicitly created a Service to keep buffering the video while I used another app. If I didn't create a Service to keep buffering when the app's Activity exited the active state, then my app would do just what the article says - the app does nothing until I explicitly return to the app.

    Am I missing something?

  • Multi-tasking (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jemenake (595948) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @01:06PM (#32679970)
    I posted this as a comment on the multi-tasking article, but I'll restate it here with a little more verbosity.

    Ever since I've had an iPhone, I've wondered what the obsession is with multitasking. I couldn't really think of any two *productive* things to do simultaneously on a phone. On a PC (by that I mean a desktop, laptop, netbook), I can appreciate the need to go do some other design work while you render a huge video, or burn a DVD, or OCR a huge document. On a phone, I can't, off-hand, think of much CPU-intensive stuff that can run for an extended time without needing to stop for user input. Because of that, productivity is lost because you're having to stop and switch apps all the time. The meaning of "EMACS" is true. Editors Make All Computers Slow. If the device is waiting for user input, then its speed (or multitasking ability) is moot.

    Wanting to Pandora to keep streaming while you tweet is *not* a productivity enhancer; it's merely letting you be a little more streamlined about wasting your time (kinda like texting while you watch TV). Now, I know I'm sounding like an old "all work, no play" curmudgeon about this (and get off my lawn, too!). Don't get me wrong. I agree that being able to keep Pandora going while I do other stuff is a nicety, but I don't think that something like that is such a "must have" thing that it warrants all of the articles and posts we've seen demanding that Apple make significant changes to the OS and its API in order to make it possible. I'd never once make the argument that the iPhone OS has some glaring hole in its functionality because I can't listen to music while I'm sending a text.

    Yet, Apple caved and gave it to us anyway. So now, the dude who wrote the article is mad because he can't go do something else while a YouTube video loads. Breaking story: If you're visiting YouTube, you've already decided that your time isn't valuable. I read another article where a guy was mad because he couldn't go switch to something else in the 5-6 seconds while a page loads in Safari (probably while he's driving, too).

    My position on full background-execution multitasking remains unchanged from the first time I tried a Windows Mobile phone after being a Palm user for years. With a small device like a phone, it's just too easy for a user to rack up this huge array of crap running in the background without realizing it. And that, potentially, has a greater impact on your productivity since it will gobble up the power in your battery. With a PC, you've got a task bar or a dock to see what you've got running. In addition, there's a one-click way of shutting off the app. Whenever a Windows Mobile user would have me look at their phone to fix it, I'd find that they had a half-dozen things still running: control panel, mail, notepad, contacts... all of these things were things where they had finished their work with those apps, but they either didn't realize that they had to close the apps or they were too lazy to press "Menu->File->Quit". Instead, they just went back to the home screen and started the next app they wanted.

    Personally, I think that Apple's compromise is a good one. If your app doesn't have a compelling reason to keep executing (like streaming audio, getting GPS updates for navigation, etc.), then the most your app really needs is just to have its state saved for quick re-launch.
    • Re:Multi-tasking (Score:5, Insightful)

      by shutdown -p now (807394) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @01:34PM (#32680442) Journal

      Personally, I think that Apple's compromise is a good one. If your app doesn't have a compelling reason to keep executing (like streaming audio, getting GPS updates for navigation, etc.), then the most your app really needs is just to have its state saved for quick re-launch.

      The problem with Apple's compromise is that the definition of "compelling" is defined by Apple, while in reality it should be defined by the user. In that sense, the Android compromise is more reasonable - the normal programming model for applications revolves around "activities", which also have lifetime not dissimilar to iOS model - an app switched into background is typically frozen. But an app can explicitly launch a background processing thread - a "service" - if it needs to; and the service can do anything at all (well, apart from displaying UI), not just something that Google has deemed "background worthy".

      What I'd like to see on Android, though, is a permission that controls whether an app is allowed to spawn background services, which would be listed alongside others in the confirmation screen when app is installed.

      • Re:Multi-tasking (Score:5, Insightful)

        by david_thornley (598059) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @03:29PM (#32682186)

        In other words, what you want is a smartphone that will confuse the heck out of the average user. Most users are not capable of making an intelligent and informed decision on what apps should be running in the background, particularly since the apps can come from anywhere and aren't necessarily vetted first. The average user will either forbid or allow most background privileges, and therefore will either get no benefit from background processing or wind up with a sluggish phone draining the battery.

        I'm not saying that what you are asking is unreasonable, but that it's simply not going to work for most people. Since Apple makes its money selling easy-to-use tech, Apple's not going to make the phone you want.

        There is a great deal of value in making things accessible to non-techies, and in order to do that you have to remove a lot of choices. That's simply the way it is. The average user doesn't know enough to make a good decision on many things, and will simply become frustrated when asked an unintelligible question. That's been one of the complaints about Microsoft: UAC, for example, relies on the user to make an accurate technical decision on the spur of the moment with insufficient information.

        On a larger system, it's easier to have more choices but to hide them normally. On a handheld, this is a lot less practical.

        There are trade-offs here. There is no one right answer. Apple's answer is perfectly valid, and useful for a wide range of people.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          There is a great deal of value in making things accessible to non-techies, and in order to do that you have to remove a lot of choices.

          You don't have to remove choices, you just have to hide them. For example, my Android phone did not allow installation of non-Market apps out of the box - but this could be turned on by digging into advanced options. Better yet, use something like "about:config" in Firefox, which requires specific knowledge and deliberate intent to activate, and cannot be discovered by chance alone.

          The problem is that Apple doesn't want you to give that choice at all. To get back to the example of installing apps from third

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Just Some Guy (3352)

      Don't get me wrong. I agree that being able to keep Pandora going while I do other stuff is a nicety, but I don't think that something like that is such a "must have" thing that it warrants all of the articles and posts we've seen demanding that Apple make significant changes to the OS and its API in order to make it possible.

      Forget Pandora. I want my VOIP app [line2.com] to be able to answer calls even when I'm not actively using it. Of course, I haven't really figured out why they couldn't handle that with push notifications, but the powers that be seem to think it requires multitasking so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

  • by mhx (772916) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @01:28PM (#32680336)
    iPhone 4, can NOT Upload 720p Videos to youtube direct from phone! What a Shame see http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=10309456 [macrumors.com]
  • by Tangential (266113) on Thursday June 24, 2010 @01:45PM (#32680590) Homepage
    Worthless to 98+% of smartPhone users. Tech folks have a very skewed and unrealistic view of what smartphones are and how they will be used. We techies want our smartphones to do a lot of what our laptops do for us.
    Regular users don't want their smartPhone to be a computer. They want it to be a phone that let's them do a few other things. They don't want to have to remember to stop apps so their battery doesn't die in a hour or 2. They don't want complex navigation. They don't want apps that make them constantly reboot their phone. They do want a simple, consistent interface and they want to know that the few apps that they buy/download/acquire will work on their phones. I would be surprised if more than a small percentage of multitasking smartphone users use any multitasking features besides music, messaging and GPS.

Whenever a system becomes completely defined, some damn fool discovers something which either abolishes the system or expands it beyond recognition.

Working...