I hope though that the prossesors in theese devices and the ram can support multitasking, even though I am not sure that I need it.
Something I posted in my other thread, but didn't mention here is that I think Apple shouldn't allow just any app to be multi-tasked. If it puts the device in danger of lagging, or even crashing - it's unacceptable. So my proposal is that an app will need to meet certain performance targets to be classified by Apple as 'multitaskable'.
(1) You're "stealing" existing and well-known behavior for your multitasking method. Holding down an app puts the iPhone OS in "app delete" mode. Now, every iPhoneOS user has to re-learn this function - not acceptable. Also, you don't address the new gesture for deleting apps - holding down Home button for 2 seconds is already reserved by Voice Control, so you can't use that.
(2) Your whole "app pair" approach is limited and generally cumbersome. Let's say I open app-A and app-B. A few minutes later I decide I want to run app-C, while keeping app-A running in background. If I understand your proposal correctly, I would have to kill
both apps, and then re-start app-C along with app-A?
(3) You've come up with the whole new UI mode ("split screen") just to run 2 apps side by side. While I understand your desire to minimize the multitasking to preserve the battery/memory resources.. This basically paints Apple into the corner. If they decide to expand the multitasking to allow more concurrent apps as advanced hardware allows it, they'll have to change the OS UI again. Poor design choice.
(4) Forcing iPhone into landscape mode - another poor design choice. I see you added a comment changing it, but you're not explaining how two apps are displayed in portrait mode. Will certainly be a challenge on smaller 3.5" screens.
(5) No obvious way to background a regularly started app, unless you originally start it in your special "multitasking mode". What if I start an app "regularly", but later decide I want to background it (without killing and restarting it first)? Inflexible and inelegant.
I can list a few more, but I think you get the idea..
1) It's true, my method does replace the current function of hold to delete. My belief is that I don't feel it is used often enough to be a significant re-learn of the user. I also feel holding the home button for two seconds to make the home screen icons jiggle around is possibly even more intuitive, if we think of the home button as relating directly to the home screen.
For voice control - point acknowledged. I've never used voice control as I only have a 1st gen touch, so had no idea it already used the home button in this way. In that case, maybe the icon jiggle command can be remapped to something else, maybe a gesture. But I do stand by my idea that holding on an icon to launch it in multi-tasking mode is the simplest and most intuitive solution, even if it would require remapping a couple of other controls.
2) It seems I didn't quite convey my idea well enough as you're misunderstanding the interface slightly. If you take a look at my crude mockup again, can you see that each window is given its own fullscreen and close controls underneath?
The idea is, in your example of opening App C, you would close the relevant app using the close button, leaving you with an icon screen again to open the next app you wish to multi-task with. To quit both, you can either press the close button of each one at a time or you can press the home button to quit both together and return back to the springboard.
3) I've asked this question a few times now, but I still haven't seen anyone give a real explanation why they need more than two apps open at once. Admittedly, at first I didn't see a need to have more than one open at once, but I understood that need when music streaming apps was pointed out to me, or dragging content from one app to another (i.e., research.) So maybe someone can explain the potential need for 3 or more to me.
4) First, I don't expect my suggested technique (or any other split-screen type suggestion) to ever work in iPhones, so I won't go into a discussion about small screens. But as for how it could work in portrait mode, I realized the apps could potentially switch into scaled versions of their landscape views and be placed above and below each other.
5) It's true. In my design, if you've started an app and wish to open another, you would need to quit the app and re-launch in multi-tasking mode. But if we assume the app saves its state on quit, and reopens quickly on an iPad, would it be that bothersome to people?
I believe we'll have to pay some price of versatility in exchange for an *obvious* interface. If there was an option to go to the home screen while leaving an app running in the background, would that be obvious to all users that they've done that and that an app is still running? I think the best way to express that to the user is have it forcibly take up a portion of the screen. Maybe an icon in the corner could work, but would that be clear to the user that it's using up their battery by being there? It could just appear to be a shortcut icon of some kind.
I'm not saying my design is the absolute full stop. I believe that the design that Apple does finally implement will need to be as obvious and clear as possible to the user of what they're doing, without having to teach them a complicated UI. I do think my design is very basic and raw. But I think it's easily possible that a couple of advanced gestures could be implemented into it, so that the techy people would find useful; something such as immediately converting an open app into multitasking mode with an advanced swipe gesture of some kind, or something like that…
