Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Multitasking Could Have Been Better...
- Thread starter DaGreat01
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not sure why you would try to use your personal computer habits as a gauge for the rest of the world. What you do on your Mac is irrelevant to what others do on their Mac. I could easily say if you don't have at least 10 apps running, you don't have much use for a Mac.
For a lot of people multitasking was just a talking point. I understand wanting to listen to Pandora while doing other things but since the view of a iPhone and iPad is designed to maximize one program UI in the foreground it makes sense to enable the core essential features that users need just as Apple has done.
To me it's pretty clear. You need big processing, multitasking with multiple windows them Mac OS X is your tool. You need lite multitasking, maximum portability and great web access then the iPad or iPhone is a great option.
You are among the very few that find Apples multi-tasking acceptable. Superior?
I'm a free thinker that doesn't mind being separated from the herd.
You are among the very few that find Apples multi-tasking acceptable. Superior?
Apple's solution is great.
It provides nearly all the functionality of "real multitasking" without draining the battery or making the app you are using running like ****.
All these people who complain about having to close apps from the dock don't get it. You don't have to manage the apps, they take care of themselves.
My Nexus One's battery is as good, if not better, than my iPhone's battery. And the N1 does real multitasking very well.
However, instead of battery, I have to watch out for data usage. Some apps which are left running background use quit a bit of data. But that's another point.
My Nexus One's battery is as good, if not better, than my iPhone's battery. And the N1 does real multitasking very well.
However, instead of battery, I have to watch out for data usage. Some apps which are left running background use quit a bit of data. But that's another point.
It should be. Android's multitasking architecture isn't bad at all. Jailbreak iPhone/Touch solutions though are hacks at best IMO.
RAM will be the weak link in multitasking smartphone before battery life.
It's all good anyhow. My 13 month old phone can't multi-task anyhow.
I'm not to impressed with the implementation of this.
I think the worst idea Apple ever had was the double clicking on the home button, a lot of the time just one click is enough to send me to the search page.
So seeing as how even if my phone could multi task, it doesn't seem like Apple is properly integrating it into the OS, The chances of me keeping this phone after contract is very very slim.
I'm not to impressed with the implementation of this.
I think the worst idea Apple ever had was the double clicking on the home button, a lot of the time just one click is enough to send me to the search page.
So seeing as how even if my phone could multi task, it doesn't seem like Apple is properly integrating it into the OS, The chances of me keeping this phone after contract is very very slim.
What's not impressive about it?
If the worst idea Apple's ever had revolves around a double click of a button then they're doing pretty damn well.
I continue to read about how Apple's implementation of multiasking isn't what they expected or impressive or whatever but few people can eloquently articulate exactly where Apple has failed.
All too often messageboards devolve into ranting and hand wringing over often trivial stuff.
Hey I'm willing to look for the next big thing as well but most of the people ranting don't seem to have a clear idea about what exactly this product would be nor where it's available.
^ Most people probably expected something a little more elegant. A lot of functionality choices seem to be locked into the UI, which is both good and bad. I think the turning point for a lot of potential buyers will be how Apple deals with notifications. If we're going to have to endure the popup bubble yet again, I think that a lot of buyers will look elsewhere. There are other devices currently on the market that do a far better job of managing the relationship between the OS and the applications. Ironically, it seems, the strongest point about the iPhone (the apps) is also its weakest.
Agreed on all points.
Moderator: stop deleting my posts.
Agreed on all points.
Moderator: stop deleting my posts.
I have a hard time believing that any significant amount of people would make a phone choice based on the notification UI.
"Elegant" is subjective. I don't want to have to manage background apps. I don't want the focus to be taken away from where I am whether I intend to switch to another app or not.
Some people like to talk as if other vendors just nailed it and by sheer luck Apple fell into a veritable goldmine with the iPhone.
The truth is the other platforms have their issues as well. iPhone OS to me isn't about multitasking (which I find rather overrated) it's about the 1500 API that will make clever developers crank out better and more engaging applications. It's about making my iPhone an even more useful and sticky device without me even realizing it.
If I can get that better with Blackberry, Android or WinMobile then I'd had no reservations about going there but at this point I don't think they offer better platforms.
Exactly. I've not heard of anyone who has mentioned anything that Apple's implementation of multi-tasking precludes in terms of functionality.
There seems to be a lot of confusion here.
Some people have tried to explain it, I will take my shot.
People are confusing fast-task switching and multi-tasking. These are not the same thing. Multi-tasking is limited to the 7 APIs they have that programs can use to operate in the background.
The fast-task switching, which is primarily what people are talking about in this thread, is the ability to switch between apps without losing data or having to restart the app. This is done in place of full-fledged multi-tasking, and provides the needed functionality for most cases, outside of the multi-tasking APIs.
The fast-task switching allows you to go back and forth from apps, but these apps are NOT running in the background. They are saved in the current state to memory, and when you switch back they are re-loaded. So you don't have a bunch of programs running in the background. In fact nothing will be running in the background of any application except for Apple programs and the 7 multi-tasking APIs.
As others noted, you have a certain amount of space/memory. If/when that is full, it will remove the oldest saved program state. So at some point you will get a program that is no longer fast-task switchable.
The biggest complaint from the OP seems not to be a real issue, because from what people have said, it keeps the most recent and used tasks listed first. So you will always have the four most recent apps in their saved state accessible first. This does what the OP wants, he just doesn't know it.
An example.
Lets say you open up App1, App 2, App 3 and App4. Now you got to the fast-app switch window and you will see 4,3,2,1
Now you run App 5. Now you go back to the task switch window and see 5,4,3,2.
Now you switch to App3. Now in the window you will see 3,5,4,2. Now you open App 6 and will see 6,3,5,4 now you switch to app 3 again and will see 3,6,5,4. If you scroll to the right you will be able to get access to 1 and 2, but since you have not used them in a while they are at the bottom of the list.
Now lets say you open app 7, but when doing this you don't have enough memory to save its state when you leave and keep app 1 in there. So when you go to task manager you will see 7,3,6,5 and if you scroll to the right you will see 4 and 2. 1 will no longer be there.
That is how I assume it will work. Suffice it to say, if you are switching back and forth between 2 or 3 apps this will work exactly how you want it to work.
Some people have tried to explain it, I will take my shot.
People are confusing fast-task switching and multi-tasking. These are not the same thing. Multi-tasking is limited to the 7 APIs they have that programs can use to operate in the background.
The fast-task switching, which is primarily what people are talking about in this thread, is the ability to switch between apps without losing data or having to restart the app. This is done in place of full-fledged multi-tasking, and provides the needed functionality for most cases, outside of the multi-tasking APIs.
The fast-task switching allows you to go back and forth from apps, but these apps are NOT running in the background. They are saved in the current state to memory, and when you switch back they are re-loaded. So you don't have a bunch of programs running in the background. In fact nothing will be running in the background of any application except for Apple programs and the 7 multi-tasking APIs.
As others noted, you have a certain amount of space/memory. If/when that is full, it will remove the oldest saved program state. So at some point you will get a program that is no longer fast-task switchable.
The biggest complaint from the OP seems not to be a real issue, because from what people have said, it keeps the most recent and used tasks listed first. So you will always have the four most recent apps in their saved state accessible first. This does what the OP wants, he just doesn't know it.
An example.
Lets say you open up App1, App 2, App 3 and App4. Now you got to the fast-app switch window and you will see 4,3,2,1
Now you run App 5. Now you go back to the task switch window and see 5,4,3,2.
Now you switch to App3. Now in the window you will see 3,5,4,2. Now you open App 6 and will see 6,3,5,4 now you switch to app 3 again and will see 3,6,5,4. If you scroll to the right you will be able to get access to 1 and 2, but since you have not used them in a while they are at the bottom of the list.
Now lets say you open app 7, but when doing this you don't have enough memory to save its state when you leave and keep app 1 in there. So when you go to task manager you will see 7,3,6,5 and if you scroll to the right you will see 4 and 2. 1 will no longer be there.
That is how I assume it will work. Suffice it to say, if you are switching back and forth between 2 or 3 apps this will work exactly how you want it to work.
I think main problem here is that every app will go to multitasking dock. Best way to go is: you are inside an app that you dont want in background. You doble tap home button and first app you see it's the same that you open with a "delete" option. So, that way you can close it for good.
what do you guys think?
what do you guys think?
About multitasking on iPhone:
"We weren't the first to this party but we're going to be the best"-Steve Jobs
What a douche!
Backgrounder (on a JB device)wipes the floor with official iPhone 4.0 multi-tasking. Steve Jobs just doesn't get it
I like backgrounder, but it slows my phone down and eats away my battery. I'm sure Apple's solution is a bit better.
About multitasking on iPhone:
"We weren't the first to this party but we're going to be the best"-Steve Jobs
What a douche!
Backgrounder (on a JB device)wipes the floor with official iPhone 4.0 multi-tasking. Steve Jobs just doesn't get it
your an idiot. Backgrounder doesn't "wipe the floor" with anything. it drains battery and you either have to deal with ugly icons on the apps or have no idea whats backgrounded. it was good when there was no other option but I think apples setup is much better.
No kidding, you would think at most you would have 4 apps opened at once.
Pandora, Email, Safari, and maybe one or two others tops?
Its a phone, apple found a great way to get us multi-tasking and people are still complaining.
It's one think to claim it wont be great on the ipad, but I think its fine for a phone.
Good lord. What is so hard to understand about this? No third-party app will run in the background. There are 7 new APIs which will allow the OS to take over and continue certain functions of third-party apps. Unless an app is currently making use of one of these 7 APIs, all the new multitasking system will do is save your app's state for a faster restart and add its icon to the 'multitasking toolber' (which is really nothing more than a recently-opened-apps list).
The ability to instantly switch between apps, with no loss of context, is the number one reason people wanted multi-tasking. And this feature delivers it.
It is not really an API. All current applications benefit from it and do not require re-coding.
In addition there are some limited and not-so-limited APIs which allow non-foreground apps to execute.
GPS apps, for instance, can sit in the background, while tracking position, recalculating the route, and reading-out driving directions.
C.
Well, not quite the context. To me, that usually means we can just click a "Back" button and automatically return to the previous app that lead me to the current app.
Everything I've read so far says apps _do_ have to be compiled with 4.0 to benefit from it. Even just for fast switching.
This is the best explanation I've seen of the system and is precisely how it appears to work. I think it will seem fairly intuitive when you use it and the user will not have to think too much about how the system operates, all they will know is that there most recent apps are always available in the first 4, and they rarely have to clean up the multitasking bar.
As far as I can tell, in order for an app to support task switching, you simply have to compile your app with the new SDK.
You don't have to change your code at all.
So it is not an API in the traditional sense. The programmer does not have to call anything to support it. They just get it for free.
To run code in background, you do have to use these new APIs.
C.
EDIT.: Not sure is correct. Compiling under 4.0 may not be necessary.
Exactly.
The people who are complaining about 'having to close apps' are terribly confused. You should not be closing apps in there. That's a fool's mission...similar to going into your web history and deleting every site you visit right after you visit it. Who does that?
The switcher is just a list of recently used apps. Nothing more and nothing less. You don't even have to open it if you don't want to use it.
This is exactly it. Apple know that multitasking is a feature that a lot of people couldn't care less about. Their job was therefore to implement it in a way where a user could continue to use their phone as they did before without ever having to worry about it.
For those that need it it's there, for those who just want their phone to work as it did before it's hidden.
All this talk about supporting multitasking reminds me of the discussion about the superiority of rack-and-pinion vs. recirculating ball. To a driver, all that matters is how the vehicle steers.
It's clear that Apple believes that developers should shoulder the burden for developing applications well on the iPhone platform. Rather than just provide a multitasking environment (which is easy - it's old hat for any OS platform to include it), they would rather have the developer think through what really needs to be done in the background.
This philosophy is aligned with their other moves (mandating Xcode for development), so what's the big deal?
It's clear that Apple believes that developers should shoulder the burden for developing applications well on the iPhone platform. Rather than just provide a multitasking environment (which is easy - it's old hat for any OS platform to include it), they would rather have the developer think through what really needs to be done in the background.
This philosophy is aligned with their other moves (mandating Xcode for development), so what's the big deal?
Have you ever actually watched the keynote? Try 11:35.
Something I would like to know about multitasking is, if you open an app from the homescreen, will it open in the same way (saved state, backgrounding) as if you open it from the multitasking dock? I assume it would but just checking.