Meaning of "multitasking" on iPhone, iPad, etc
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Woody on 29 Jan 2010 05:19 On 29/01/2010 10:00, Geoff Berrow wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:41:47 +0000, Ian McCall<ian(a)eruvia.org> wrote: > >>> After all you can see and use only one >>> app at a time anyway. >> >> See - yes. Use? No - see the two use cases above. Anything playing >> audio is a use case. Anything doing instant messaging is a use case (I >> see you note these in your post too). Anything monitoring GPS in the >> background is a use case (I'd like to use my GPS trails tracker when on >> the bike, but still switch to the camera app for example). > > Some apps get round that by building in the multi tasking. Motion X > GPS for example will allow you to run playlists and take photographs. > Heck of a drain on the battery though. > > But this isn't the end of time and if other phones are significantly > better than the iPhone then the market will decide. > > I like my iPhone. I like the way it looks, feels, and works. But I > am annoyed I can't get at my files and that it doesn't multi-task. But > knowing that battery takes a hammering I accept that limitation. > > Later on, with a model with more battery and resources, I'd be less > happy. I have multitasking now i have jailbroken, and have yet to notice a difference in battery life, but then I don't do much in the background. If I use power hungry applications it will wear the battery out quicker, which is fair enough (as it does already). It is better with it than without. But for most people, in most cases it won't matter. And to be honest from a phone point of view, I would prefer proper bluetooth to proper multitasking any day of the week. That is probably the only thing I miss going to the iPhone. -- Woody
From: Ian McCall on 29 Jan 2010 06:31 On 2010-01-29 10:19:59 +0000, Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> said: > And to be honest from a phone point of view, I would prefer proper > bluetooth to proper multitasking any day of the week. That is probably > the only thing I miss going to the iPhone. Hmm - could you elaborate? What proper Bluetooth, do mean browsing and file-sending? Cheers, Ian
From: Woody on 29 Jan 2010 07:08 On 29/01/2010 11:31, Ian McCall wrote: > On 2010-01-29 10:19:59 +0000, Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> said: > >> And to be honest from a phone point of view, I would prefer proper >> bluetooth to proper multitasking any day of the week. That is probably >> the only thing I miss going to the iPhone. > > Hmm - could you elaborate? What proper Bluetooth, do mean browsing and > file-sending? Browsing I guess but I generally didn't do that. Sending certainly. I used to take a picture and then bluetooth it to my computer or sabs phone or computer. It was quick and easy. Now it is a faff. I could also send contacts between phones (of different makes), mp3s (or aacs in nokias case) to the phone. How much effort would it have been to put that in. There is a jailbroken app to do it, which means there isn't any technical reason why not, I hoped apple were going to update to put it in. I have had that on phones since the early 2000s, so it is nothing unusual, and I used it a lot and do miss it. -- Woody
From: Jaimie Vandenbergh on 29 Jan 2010 08:39 On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:31:11 +0000, Ian McCall <ian(a)eruvia.org> wrote: >On 2010-01-29 10:19:59 +0000, Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> said: > >> And to be honest from a phone point of view, I would prefer proper >> bluetooth to proper multitasking any day of the week. That is probably >> the only thing I miss going to the iPhone. > >Hmm - could you elaborate? What proper Bluetooth, do mean browsing and >file-sending? File transfer and contact transfer. So 1990's to have to either email or hand-type a contact across! Cheers - Jaimie -- The advantage of a bad memory is that one can enjoy the same good things for the first time several times. -- Nietzsche
From: Nancy on 29 Jan 2010 10:49
Ian McCall wrote: > On 2010-01-28 23:02:56 +0000, Jochem Huhmann <joh(a)gmx.net> said: > >> Nancy <metoo(a)privacy.net> writes: >>> Agreed. Can you imagine not being able to, say, do something like >>> listen to music on your iPad while browsing the web? >> >> But you can. As long as you use the Music app, which does run in the >> background (as well as Safari and Mail). > > ...which I don't. I want to run Spotify or SomaFM/some other net radio app. > > >> After all you can see and use only one >> app at a time anyway. > > See - yes. Use? No - see the two use cases above. Anything playing audio > is a use case. Anything doing instant messaging is a use case (I see you > note these in your post too). Anything monitoring GPS in the background > is a use case (I'd like to use my GPS trails tracker when on the bike, > but still switch to the camera app for example). > > There's loads of use cases. The single-tasking vs multi-tasking argument > was answered with the introduction of System 6's multifinder. It was a > conclusive win, and all subsequent Apple OSs have multitasked until now. > >> But the battery and the RAM *will* see the >> difference. And I'm not sure if Apple is totally wrong here. > > I am, and it's my phone. They can give me the choice via a preferences > setting that's defaulting to off if they like, but I want to use it. > Battery isn't that relevant to me as I keep the phone in a dock a lot. > RAM - well yes, but this is the use I have for the phone so it's just > something Apple will have to accommodate. Android phones have the same > limitations, but they allow multitasking. Am not getting into Android vs > iPhone here, just pointing out another device with similar hardware can > do this kind of thing fine. Android's secret for multitasking is that it allows 3rd party apps to run in the background as services, and it has very good memory management. If and when it does have to kill off a background app to give more resources to a foreground app, the background app being killed off saves it's current state, so that when you do go back to it, you are right where you were when you left it, and it's as though it never closed. That design makes it appear flawless. One would think that iPhones could run apps in the background as services, but they choose to lock that feature out?! And battery is not as relevant to those who have a phone with a removable battery. They can buy a spare battery and switch them out when one runs low. > > >> There are only a few apps that suffer from that: Third-party music >> streaming apps, IM apps cutting the connection if you switch to another >> app. But these are exceptions. > > They're also my primary use of third-party apps. Oh, and you can add > note-taking to that too. I want to switch in and out of Notes without > quitting the other app, and if my other app happens to be on page 5 of > my app list but Notes is on page 1 then it becomes annoying to switch > between them. For games too - for example The Warlock Of Firetop > Mountain, an iPhone version of ye olde Fighting Fantasy > choose-your-own-adventure book, quits when you press the home key and > then goes through a startup sequence/asks if you want a new game or > continue. What I actually want to do is map my progress using the Notes > app, but it's made extremely long-winded and annoying so I don't do it. > >> For most apps you can just pretend that >> the home screen works like the Dock: > > -if- the app is on the same page. Otherwise it's just annoying to flip > between them. > The young generation find it annoying to not have enough simultaneous apps to flip though, lol. > > - >> Go to it from some app, tap >> another app, go back to the homescreen, tap the first app. OK, it takes >> a moment (since the apps actually quit and relaunch) but on the other >> hand every app has all RAM and there's nothing running in the background >> eating up CPU time and battery. > > Again, these are similar to arguments made around the System 6 switch. > Battery life is irrelevant to a device sitting in the dock. CPU time and > RAM is a matter of good programming, exactly as it is on any other OS. > It's all an argument that's been seen before and the world conclusively > picked multitasking. > > > I really don't want to jailbreak the phone for a variety of reasons, but > must admit that getting multitasking onto it is sorely tempting me. > I can see why. |