iPhone 4 News Roundup 568
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.
Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
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:Here's your roundup (Score:2, Insightful)
>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:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Informative)
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:Here's your roundup (Score:4, Insightful)
As stated in my previous post, the appstore would most likely be able to serve all of my needs, as far as applications are concerned...but that's not the point. The point is that there is no reason to pay a company so that they can tell me what I can and can't do with their device when there is another company that sells a similar device that lets me do whatever the hell I want with it. ::shrug:: That's it.
Oh, and please...don't try to make comparisons to game consoles being closed too. That's an entirely different conversation.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
ScummVM.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
What application is it that you're desperate to use that has been barred from the app store? I'm just curious
Debating over the length of the leash always seemed odd to me when the existence of the leash itself is unacceptable.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
Contest it if you must, but the day of consumer hardware being sold based on the needs of the developers who write for it, is over. That day is simply over. Consumers rule.
Oh really? So then, care to explain why Android has seen such explosive growth?
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Nonsense. AT&T is irrelevant in the rest of the entire world, and Android phones sell very well in countries where the iPhone is available on all major carriers.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
Fragmentation is an exaggerated issue. I target Android 1.6 and my apps can run on the majority of devices while not missing much in the way of features added by later versions. The best part about this argument, is that the iPhone is seeing plenty of its own fragmentation in its closed world. Some phones can't get iOS4, and many don't get all the features. These talking points are old and tired.
Adobe just shipped Flash Player 10.1 for mobile, which requires an OS that most Android users currently don't have, and who won't for a while. That "open" platform isn't doing much for actual customers.
It's doing a helluva a lot more for a helluva a lot more people than say, Apple's no-flash-for-anyone phone.
They'd better do it soon (Score:4, Insightful)
"The day Apple makes iPhone available on Verizon, the market for Android devices will take an enormous hit."
Apple should have released it on Verizon 6 months ago. Apple is letting Google's platform become firmly entrenched, and now that hardware manufacturers don't have to write their own OS, they can provide all kinds of interesting handset features. This will rapidly become a PC versus Mac type battle.
The point is, if Apple waits another year to release to Verizon, the impact will be interesting, but it will be too late to have the kind of impact you think.
Developer's Perspective (Score:5, Informative)
From a developer's perspective, iOS is the platform to beat.
Median iOS developer income per app: $682 per year [blogs.com].
Re:Developer's Perspective (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:4, Funny)
Flip it upside-down and attack it with a hammer, screw-driver, knife and vice-grips. There's nothing that can't be "fixed" with those 4 tools.
And if you make it worse - it was broken anyways. You now have spare parts.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
Additionally, someone has to take time out of their normal work day to wait around for the buggers to show up, and then hope that they don't take a liking to something in your house that can fit in a pocket.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
Hey, we're mostly geeks here -- he probably DOES get some emotional fulfillment out of repairing his washing machine. I know I get a sense of satisfaction from doing same. Though when I recently tried, I found the outer drum was rusted through in spots. $250 part (including shipping), backordered from everywhere (probably actually discontinued), a bear of a job anyway, 25 year old machine... new washer time.
But your efficiency calculations miss a couple of important things. One is that time to get someone else to do the work isn't free either. You spend time calling them (and on hold with them). They then give you a four-hour window (or worse, a whole day) in which they can show up, time you're stuck waiting for them. Then they miss that window and you're stuck waiting some more and making more phone calls. Then they tell you they can't do the job without some part they didn't bring with them, and it's another service call.
The other is that they like to jack up the price once they're on the job, even if they quoted you a flat rate. Having just bought a house I've been getting a lot of that lately. So you end up wasting time AND money trying to get someone else to do it, particularly if you don't work from home and have to take time off to wait for them.
park the jurassic a bit... (Score:3, Interesting)
Why the "open it" movement is called a movement, is exactly, because it began in circumstances, were not much was open.
Being consumer oriented, by decidinig, what a costumer should be able to do, and what not, is only decided by what makes first mentioned become second mentioned in greatest percentages, nothing more.
The iPhone is for people who want to use a cool gadget, not for people who want to have a gadget for all their things they want to use it to.
And yes, everybody is both a little bit. That's why adapting of dinosaurs does not build upon change of "antiquated" views, but instead on having an idealistic opinion while getting a realistic attitude.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Liar. You "vastly prefer" buying from Apple to any open system, and that's all there is to it. Symbian is open, and vastly more widespread than the iOS. Android is open. Maemo is open. Saying that "the open system" is never going to happen is patently absurd.
Re:Someone doesn't grok Econ 101 (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft? Can you install anything you like on a Zune? No. Can you install what you want on an XBox 360? No. Will you be able to install freely on a Kin or other Windows Phone 7 series device? No. Comparing Windows to iPhones is comparing apples and clay bricks.
Apple are NOT falling behind, because only a TINY fraction of users are tech-geeks who "need" full control over their device. The ONLY thing propping Android up is the Google support, there have been other open platforms and they failed. Why? Because the openness is not in demand by the majority of the market. It would not surprise me if the three million iPads sold in three months exceed the total number of Windows-based tablets manufactured since the release of Windows 3 Pen Edition back in the day...
Most people want something that just works. Which is what Apple sells.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the phones for our grandmothers are made by Nokia and come free with your contract.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, 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.
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:Here's your roundup (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.
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:Here's your roundup (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.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Life is really too short to be idealistic about freaking phone apps.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, there are a lot of applications that would be useful that Apple forbids because it "competes" with Apple's own offerings, can run other code (with the new A4 processor that opens up a lot of emulation possibilities), etc.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:2)
The difference is that with a car there are very few situations where you would need to go 90 MPH +
I can tell you don't live west of the Mississippi River. There's a LOT of open country to cover out here. Most Interstate Highway speed limits are 80, which means you'll get passed a lot if you do 80.
And your phone will drop calls faster since you move out of range a lot faster.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Funny)
Everyone does, if you keep going.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Put an unlock option somewhere in the settings behind a huge disclaimer, hell, you could even have it send a registration message to apple when the user unlocks the phone, voiding all warrantee
Also, make said disclaimer SHORT, putting it in a 100 page EULA will just make people click 'OK' and then get upset about breaking their phone without knowing it could be done at all..
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:2, Insightful)
No, because cars that are artificially limited (including my own, a 2004 RSX Type-S) are generally capped at 155 MPH. I don't know about you, but I have no intention of driving 155 MPH. If I was interested in driving faster than that, I wouldn't have bought a car that was artificially limited. I do, however, intend to install whatever I want on my phone without wondering if I have to hack the hardware first, which is why I have a phone where I can do exactly that.
Apples to oranges, bud. Apples to oranges.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's be honest - you're dismissing the car argument because the cap is sufficiently high that you don't have the requisite expertise to operate it safely - placing you in the majority of car users. You don't see the arbitrary restriction on the iphone the same way because you're one of the few people who does have the expertise to not brick their phone.
You can argue that the scale and safety implications are different, but what it boils down to is that you don't feel there should be any arbitrary restrictions on you in an area where you are an expert. And while that's understandable, the comparison is absolutely valid. Many consumer products have arbitrary limitations and restrictions placed on them in the interests of simplifying the devices for "the majority" of users. Unfortunately, your expertise with computers places you outside "the majority" of iPhone users, and so some of those restrictions are bound to chafe.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3, Insightful)
So you agree that somebody should be able to apply arbitrary restrictions about how and where I use my devices (and vehicles)? Sounds to me like the analogy works just fine.
Experts never like being told they can't do something in an area of their expertise. "But that restriction surely shouldn't apply to me, I *know better*!" But the restrictions aren't there for you, they're there for the 99% of the other users who don't have your expertise. The iPhone has been restricted for, and marketed to the masses, not to experts.
Which is where your point about competition comes in - there are devices that are open for experts to play with. The iphone, unfortunately for you and the rest of the experts, is not one of them, as much as you might wish it to be.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:3)
I know a waste of good mod points when I see one.
Are you "insightfully" comparing the speed of a car which can KILL to being able to install any app you like on your iPhone, like Google Voice, my ISP's VOIP, or even just porn pics if I plain want it?
Wow the brain washing has just gone one step further.
Re:Here's your roundup (Score:2, Interesting)
Why do we always feel obligated to put that at the end of our posts? Don't get me wrong, I do it all the time. But your entire most was I this and I that, you never once used the word "you". So of course its your opinion and you aren't speaking for others. But if you don't say it you risk people flaming back.
I do it because people asking why I'm including it is far less annoying than people asking why I'm "presenting my opinion like it's the only one that matters" :-) You're a regular around here...I'm sure you've seen it.
Re:You also can't load code onto your microwave (Score:5, Insightful)
Your face is wrong :p
But seriously though.
If you think of the iPhone as an appliance and not a computer, then it makes perfect sense.
I often hear this argument, and my response is always the same: it doesn't matter how you spin it, it doesn't matter what you call it, it doesn't matter what you "think of it as"...the fact is, Apple offers a restricted product while others offer an unrestricted product. I have a choice as a consumer, and I've made one.
You forgot one (Score:5, Funny)
The screens have yellow spots [engadget.com]. Apparently these "retina" displays have cataracts.
Re:You forgot one (Score:5, Informative)
Re:You forgot one (Score:5, Informative)
Apple is using a bonding agent called Organofunctional Silane Z-6011 to bond the layers of glass. Apparently, Apple (or more likely Foxconn) is shipping these products so quickly that the evaporation process is not complete. However, after one or two days of use, especially with the screen on, will complete the evaporation process and the yellow "blotches" will disappear. How do I know? I was involved in pitching Z-6011 to Apple.
No one is denying that it exists, its just that it could very well just be the bonding agent not drying yet.
Re:You forgot one (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You forgot one (Score:3, Funny)
It's Official (Score:5, Funny)
It's still mostly used for calls... (Score:5, Insightful)
They did (Score:5, Informative)
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:It's still mostly used for calls... (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:It's still mostly used for calls... (Score:4, Insightful)
...Perhaps Apple has been paying attention to this area? That would help explain why a prototype was found in the wild.
Yeah, a prototype which was tested inside a thick casing made of dielectric material.
Re:It's still mostly used for calls... (Score:3, Funny)
Privacy Violations are BS (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:Privacy Violations are BS (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Oh. Well that settles it then. If "MuscleNerd" tweeted it, then that's enough for me.
makes little technical sense (Score:3, Interesting)
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:makes little technical sense (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:makes little technical sense (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:makes little technical sense (Score:3, Informative)
Lifespan of iPhone is already artificially limited. With the current prices of flash, how small part of it mobile OSes actually need, and how large part of this storage is almost always static anyway, there shouldn't be much of a problem when FS is aware of the issue and rotates the space used as swap every now and then.
Symbian devices support virtual memory for some time now, and there was no wave of them suddenly starting to die.
Re:makes little technical sense (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:makes little technical sense (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:makes little technical sense (Score:3, Insightful)
"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."
Sure, because managing files is something that millions of PC users have never done before.
Re:makes little technical sense (Score:4, Insightful)
You've clearly never had to manage files on a WM phone. A 3.5" screen, even with 480 resolution, is not conducive to intensive file management.
Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:5, Insightful)
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:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:3, Informative)
My iPhone's tray is six icons wide [modmyi.com], you insensitive clod!
Re:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:3, Insightful)
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:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:3, Insightful)
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 enough problems understanding the concept of running applications in the background, and more so in a small screen where there is no permanent dock or taskbar.
Re:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:4, Informative)
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?
Re:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:3, Insightful)
I understood your point, but it's a problem only because Apple rushed their phone to market without a fundamental feature included.
Re:Multitasking complaint is kind of bogus (Score:3, Informative)
It is not a multitasking tray - it is the most recently used apps, whether or not those apps support the fake multitask apis.
phone-hand issues (Score:5, Funny)
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!
Queuing in Hampstead this morning at 6.30 (Score:3, Funny)
Not trolling... (Score:5, Informative)
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!
So (Score:2)
the long and short of it is that I should just jailbreak my iPhone instead?
Reception Issue - Hacked (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Reception Issue - Hacked (Score:3, Informative)
Wow, that's a really specific allergy. I guess people can be allergic to about anything. But I've never heard of being allergic to a specific metal before.
It's really common, actually. It sounds like the GP has a stronger allergy to nickel, but lots of people are alergic to nickle in earings and other jewelry, as I am. I can't wear cheap costume earings, only stainless steel, or high grade silver or gold. Yeah, that's how I roll...
Sensitized individuals may show an allergy to nickel affecting their skin, also known as dermatitis. Sensitivity to nickel may also be present in patients with pompholyx. Nickel is an important cause of contact allergy, partly due to its use in jewellery intended for pierced ears.[43] Nickel allergies affecting pierced ears are often marked by itchy, red skin. Many earrings are now made nickel-free due to this problem. The amount of nickel which is allowed in products which come into contact with human skin is regulated by the European Union. In 2002 researchers found amounts of nickel being emitted by 1 and 2 Euro coins far in excess of those standards. This is believed to be due to a galvanic reaction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel#Toxicity [wikipedia.org]
My favorite:
It was voted Allergen of the Year in 2008 by the American Contact Dermatitis Society.
That's gotta be a fun awards ceremony..
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Wrong about multitasking (Score:5, Insightful)
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:Wrong about multitasking (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wrong about multitasking (Score:4, Interesting)
It's just not a well-designed feature.
I disagree, I think it's simple and elegant. A stack with the most recently run app always moving to the top (left) makes sense to me and I've found switching between the handful of apps I'm using during any given period really efficient. Any app I'm not actively switching back to naturally falls away as recently viewed apps move in front of it.
If you don't delete them manually, eventually all your apps are going to appear there, and what the hell is the use of that?
It really doesn't matter how deep the stack goes (though I assume there is some arbitrary limit). It's not as if they add any visual clutter since you have to actively scroll to see them and as mentioned above, if you didn't use an app recently the natural thing to do is to use it's icon on the home page. It's only confusing if you think you have to manually manage each app's state. But the whole point behind Apple's limited multi-tasking and UI is that the end user should not have to manage an app's state.
There needs to be a way of quitting apps without adding them to the bar.
And there is the rub. You don't typically "quit" an iOS app, you switch away from it. Whether the app actually exits or not is determined by the app and iOS. You can choose to force the app to exit, but there is rarely any need (so far the only reason I've forced an app to close was to see how that changed it's behavior next time I switched to it.)
Multitasking as the dev's responsiblity. Common? (Score:4, Informative)
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)
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)
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)
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:Multi-tasking (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-party sources, not only iPhone does not provide any way to disable this feature, but the third-party workaround to do so - jailbreaking - is claimed by Apple to be in violation of the law (DMCA anti-circumvention provisions), so they clearly don't want you to do that.
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.
Why is it less practical? How, exactly, a handheld is different in that regard?
Re:Multi-tasking (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Why NOT Multi-tasking?? (Score:3, Insightful)
You realize that your entire argument goes down the drain with that one exception?
How about if you wanted to take down notes with your phone WHILE watching said instructive YouTube video?
Point is, people have perfectly legitimate, non-time-wasting reasons to "bellyache" (as you so put it) for multitasking. Don't treat those reasons as unimportant (implicit from your accusation that "they have already decided that their time isn't valuable") just because *you* don't have those reasons.
I hope you don't mind me omitting the trollish end of your sentence. I *do* switch between the web browser and the maps app on my Android phone when navigating on foot to somewhere, with the web browser bringing up the website of my destination (to get address details that the map won't show, e.g. when the destination is inside a mall).
Even though it's one USER task, those are still two PHONE tasks running at the same time. I expect my phone to keep up with me. 5 to 6 seconds is an awfully long time when you're running late.
Needless to say I'm quite glad I've been able to do what I do on my Android long before *anyone* can do it on an iPhone, thanks to multitasking.
Heck my older Nokia 6680 has been doing it way before these new-fangled phones, and I've always found it useful.
I wonder what the obsession is with your kind about BASHING the existence of multitasking on phones.
iPhone 4, can NOT Upload 720p Videos to youtube (Score:4, Interesting)
Smartphone reviews by techies are worthless (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Left handed (Score:5, Funny)
Apple prefers if you use your phone with both hands, in particular while visiting certain web sites; it keeps you out of trouble and prevents the moisture sensor from triggering.
iOS4 = Windows 3.0? (Score:2, Funny)
Remember?
Cooperative multitasking, rather than preemptive multitasking. The burden of "playing nice" (pun intended for the Unix literate) falls upon the application.
State of the art for desktop computers, circa 87-92.
Re:iOS4 = Windows 3.0? (Score:5, Informative)
iPhone has preemptive multitasking, too, it's just not fully exposed to applications.
However, a misbehaving application cannot prevent others from running, which was the case with true cooperative multitasking OSes, such as Win3.x.
Re:iOS4 = Windows 3.0? (Score:2)
What the fuck are you talking about? (Score:3, Informative)
Android supports full preemptive multitasking, thanks to it being built on Linux.
You do realize that you can't change reality, or the pain that you suffer from due to having bought an iPhone, by spreading outright lies about non-Apple devices and software, right?
Regardless of what you say or believe, Android will still support preemptive multitasking, while iOS does not.
Re:What the fuck are you talking about? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What the fuck are you talking about? (Score:4, Insightful)
Try again. iPhone apps can't call the equivalent even of Windows 3.1 yield(); - they either run in the foreground, or they're suspended - like the DOS 5.0 task swapper.
The few exceptions need to take advantage of a special api call for music, of all things.
If you want a real multi-tasking OS on your phone, you won't get it from Apple. Not this year, and not next year. They're already starting to fall behind in the features race.
Re:What the fuck are you talking about? (Score:5, Informative)
Try again. iPhone apps can't call the equivalent even of Windows 3.1 yield(); - they either run in the foreground, or they're suspended - like the DOS 5.0 task swapper.
Don't be disingenuous. The parent was correct; iOS has a kernel with a preemptive task scheduler, and there are any number of API calls which explicitly yield or do the moral equivalent (any blocking I/O API call). Even while an app runs in the foreground it is always being multitasked with other parts of the system.
Also, by definition tasks in a preemptive multitasking OS either run or are suspended, at the operating system's whim. The difference between that and a system like DOS 5 is left as an exercise for the reader.
The few exceptions need to take advantage of a special api call for music, of all things.
And other 'special' APIs for other things. Apple has tried to come up with a comprehensive list of tasks which can usefully be backgrounded on a smartphone, such as messaging, downloads, and yes, audio playback. You simply register a thread (process? dunno the exact details) as providing such a service, and the OS allows it to continue to receive timeslices (assuming it's not blocked on I/O) while your main application is held suspended because it's not in the foreground. There are significant limits on what you can do in that context, but they all make sense in terms of limiting power consumption.
If you want a real multi-tasking OS on your phone, you won't get it from Apple. Not this year, and not next year. They're already starting to fall behind in the features race.
Oh please. You're smart enough to know that iOS is built on the Darwin kernel, and what that implies about its multitasking capabilities. All the limitations are deliberate and carefully thought out. It's undeniable that they're there because Apple thinks they will provide a better overall user experience, because the path of least effort for Apple would have let users multitask anything on day 1 of the app store going live. Instead they went to the trouble of doing extra work to restrict it.
Argue against the design of iOS 4's carefully limited multitasking if you like (oh no! That would require you to actually inform yourself! Can't have that), but pretending it's not "real" and that they're falling years behind is just trollish.
Re:Do you understand preemptive multitasking? (Score:3, Informative)
Preemptive multitasking is a feature of the kernel which iOS fully supports, it however restricts access to it for regular applications except through a small set of APIs.
Re:Left handed (Score:5, Funny)
They couldn't justify cutting my Apps out of the market place. I had left-handed solitaire, left-handed minesweeper. I was starting a smorgasbord of left handed products. With no justifiable reason to keep me out, and with all the bad press lately about them selectively choosing their App store, they've decided to lock me out at the hardware level.
Those dastardly fiends!
Re:Reception seems bad for either hand (Score:2)
So far it seems that which hand you hold it in defines which kind of signal will be inhibited - cell, or WiFi.
Re:Reception seems bad for either hand (Score:3, Insightful)
"see... if I touch here, it does this.ll but if I let go... look! This thing is messed up!"
I hope I'm not the first to call bullshit on all the reported reception problems. All these iphone owners have a single phone, and widely reported anacdotal evidence of fewer bars when you pick it up isn't fucking science and means absolutely nothing at all. Gizmodo's Jason Chen broke this non-story, and failed to do even the tiniest amount of research which would have yielded that since the inception of cell phone technology, a cell phone that is sitting perfectly still will get better reception that one you are waving around. Also, I'd like to point out that each iPhone release was plagued by false reports of reception problems. It's all bullshit. Yes, I don't doubt what you are rabidly saying, that you lose bars when you pick it up, what I'm telling you guys is that it is known and expected behavior. It's a cell phone. That's one of the things they've always done.