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.
browser tests, iPhone vs G1 vs. Pre
- Thread starter clevin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But the iphone is supposed to be the next BEST thing, but yet you can only do 1 thing at a time with it.. I hope that changes soon.. I would love to use pandora while I'm responding to an e-mail or texting....
James
Um, please see his post, #38, in this very thread. I'm glad he finally explained it and look forward to seeing it in action, live.
To supplement that...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/03/palm-pre-review-part-1-hardware-webos-user-interface/
Off the engadget review. Watch the video showing off the gestures.
Really shows you how easy it is flipping between open applications.
Unless and until someone figures out how to make more than one application visible in a usable size on a 3" screen, a phone will never have "desktop level multitasking."
nothing in that review is desktop-level multitasking. Thats like a pretty version of windows mobile.
exactly
also, its funny to see the people talking about it being "unresponsive"
so, youve never had to tap anything on your iphone a second time? im very impressed
Not this argument again...
It fails.
And yes, I already know you use multiple monitors, but no one really cares what you do with your computer. Modern OS's are not generally designed to be used like that. Machines that do run them require non-standard display adapters (graphics card) and then the displays must be calibrated - hardly "out of the box".
Look at my computer screen right now. I have 3 applications displayed at once, all are visible and usable without moving the windows. This doesn't require multiple monitors or adapters or graphics cards. No calibration required.
This is desktop level multitasking. Not some one-at-a-time application viewing thing with applications running in the background.
And check this out, on my computer, I can browse the web, edit a document, read tweets and browse files all at the same time!
![picture1lze.png]()
This is desktop level multitasking.
Actually... you can do them... one at a time. Unless, of course, somehow you are able to read one tweeted sentence with one eyeball and type a completely different sentence on another part of the screen with the other eyeball. After all, your inactive tasks are grayed out.
Congratulations, you just discovered the quickest way to switch between running applications - the speed it takes your eyeball to move 10°. I'm sure that kind of speed on a mobile device is at least a decade away, but don't worry, webOS will have it before iPhone OS.
Yep - in speed.
What clevin has been saying is that webOS has the same multi-tasking usability as a desktop. He's already explained what that means in this thread and others.
It has nothing to do with how much you can see at any given time, but how tasks are managed.
The real win on a phone platform, is not the ability to have tasks sit in the background and do stuff. Which in many ways is an undesirable thing.
I don't want my foreground application having to fight for resources with a background application, if the price for that is a reduction in the speed of my main application.
The real win is having a task ready for instant resume - continuing identically from where we left it. That is the real benefit.
Being able to quickly and easily shift between 2 or more RAM resident applications would improve the iPhone.
C.
Spoken like a true fanboy. Tell me, how much does your computer slow down when you're running Safari and iTunes?
Now i'm interested.
How is it a pretty version of Windows Mobile?
Pretty version of Windows Mobile:
It still has the crappy shell of Windows Mobile under the glitz.
How rude!
I am saying that Apple *should* change the OS to allow apps to stay memory resident - and facilitate instant switching. That's where the real benefit lies for improving the user experience. Such a change would need more RAM in the iPhone. Which I think is coming.
Thankfully my computer slows down very little with iTunes running in the background. It barely steals 1% of the CPU. For that matter my iPhone doesn't slow down much either running the iPod in background. I have never heard once heard the audio stutter. Although I understand the Pre does, despite having a faster CPU than the 3G iPhone.
The iPhone needs a change, the benefit of instant switching would be significant. But the benefit of background apps is pretty minimal. I don't want background apps stealing resources, when time-critical apps are in the foreground.
If all backgrounded apps could be corralled into "No more than 5% cpu cap" - then I might be happy.
C.
I thought this thread was supposed to be about mobile browser tests. I guess I read the title wrong.
Fair point.
The video shows the Pre to be marginally faster at loading web-pages than the iPhone3g.
Given it's the rendering time, and not the network speed which is the bottleneck here, one would expect the faster cpu'd Pre to win.
C.
Even under 3G circumstances on the Engadget test the Pre won. (even tho supposidly Sprint's network is garbage...)
http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/03/palm-pre-review-part-2-synergy-phone-media-applications/
