Glad that iOS4 was not available for iPads yet

Discussion in 'iPad' started by silverblack, Jun 24, 2010.

  1. silverblack macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #1
    Upgrade to iOS4 on my 3GS yesterday, and hated the multitasking feature. I wish I could downgrade back to 3.1.3...

    The problem is described here
    http://www.pcworld.com/article/1995...os_4_is_horrible_apple_blew_it.html?tk=hp_new
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ytech_wguy/20100623/tc_ytech_wguy/ytech_wguy_tc2799

    First, it not true multitasking, only a few apps actually *run in the background. The rest just *pause or standby.

    The second problem is, when you close an app everytime, it defaults to the background. You don't have a choice to properly *close the app. :mad:

    Apple better fix this, or else my iPad stays as iOS 3.2.

    [Update]: I downgraded my iPhone OS is back from 4.0 to 3.1.3, thanks to the SHSH on Saurik's server. I am a happy camper once again :D
     
  2. ditzy macrumors 68000

    ditzy

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2007
    #2
    You can properly close an app. You go into multi-tasking menu hold you finger on one of the apps, after about three seconds a little red symbol will be on the apps. When you press the red symbol it closes the app.
     
  3. TheMacBookPro macrumors 68020

    TheMacBookPro

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    #3
    What he was trying to get at was the fact that every single time he presses the home button it automagically backgrounds the app.

    It does seem pretty annoying though if you had to go through the charade of tapping and holding an icons and pressing X to close the app completely. Would be nice if we had the choice to do it backgrounder-style (press and hold to background).
     
  4. Beaverman3001 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    #4
    One of my friends who is new to the iPhone platform recently upgraded his phone to iOS4 and absolutely hates. He finds the way of closing a app too annoying. I think he is being picky but to each his own.

    Everyone cries for multitasking, then when its out everyone complains about having to use multitasking.
     
  5. silverblack thread starter macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #5
    Exactly. Thank you.

    Sure. But how many times you want to do that, day after day.
     
  6. Blakjack macrumors 68000

    Blakjack

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    #6
    The developers need to create an option to quit the app instead of hitting the home button. This way, the app doesn't go into the background.

    And I like the idea that many apps will just pause instead of running in the background. Things like games don't need to run behind the scenes. Pausing is perfect. As long as Pandora and my voip apps do true multitasking, I'm good. I don't need my battery being drained like EVOs. The idea is to be able to carry a device without the worries of battery life. You can't multitask if your device is dead. Think of it that way.
     
  7. Roy Hobbs macrumors 68000

    Roy Hobbs

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    #7
    Why are people worried about quitting apps??
    Just let them run and they the OS manage the RAM
     
  8. Graeme43 macrumors 6502a

    Graeme43

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Great Britain (Glasgow)
    #8
    I wish I had OS4 iPad :) can't wait! I know what you mean about closing apps as I just closed 10 apps. I wonder how it'll work on iPad with the longer screen
     
  9. silverblack thread starter macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #9
    For one, rumors says that when Mail run in the background, it will continue to fetch, even though you set it to 'Manually'.
     
  10. master-ceo macrumors 65816

    master-ceo

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Location:
    The SUN
    #10
    I wont be updating my iPad unless theirs some serious upgrades in the new OS.
    I Really USE my iPad and don't think the 256mb ram can handle it. Especially the way some apps crash without reason.
     
  11. Mitchrapp macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    #11
    I get your last point but I think we all want effective Multitasking. Holding down an app 3 seconds before you can close seems, well, dumb. Maybe Apple should try and learn from Cydia - Backgrounder.
     
  12. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #12
    +1

    I wonder if there were cavemen who complained when fire was discovered.
     
  13. T4R06 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2007
    Location:
    CT
    #13
    I upgraded my old 3G and i like it a lot. The fact that you can now see your multiple email client in one windows is really awesome..
     
  14. topmounter macrumors 68020

    topmounter

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Location:
    FEMA Region VIII
    #14


    Because we're old school Windows users and leaving applications open unnecessarily is baaaad :p



    ... and it is a shame that there isn't a way to reverse the multi-task / close process, I know everyone screams like multi-tasking is the most important thing in the world (you know, like cut-n-paste), but how often do you really want/need to multi-task an app? There are definitely specific apps that you do want to multi-task, so it would be nice to be able to set whether an app multi-tasks or not on the default key-press in the app itself.
     
  15. jdavtz macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    Kenya
    #15
    Why do you want to keep closing apps fully?

    I think (presume) the idea is that the OS handles everything, but if you find something's eating your CPU/battery, you do have the option to manually close it.

    Otherwise, try letting the OS do its job, it seems to work well.
     
  16. skubish macrumors 68030

    skubish

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    Location:
    Ann Arbor, Michigan
    #16
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)

    Love iOS4. I would never want to go back.
     
  17. silverblack thread starter macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #17
    I am not complaining multitasking, but *how it is implemented. They are two very different matters.

    Fire is great, but if someone invented a fire that cannot be put out easily... that's a different story.
     
  18. Graeme43 macrumors 6502a

    Graeme43

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Location:
    Great Britain (Glasgow)
  19. brentsg macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #19

    This fire has a bit of a yellow tint..
     
  20. chris975d macrumors 68000

    chris975d

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2008
    Location:
    Georgia, USA
    #20
    The problem I have is that the apps that are backgrounded (even apps that haven't been updated to use the iOS 4 APIs) are still somehow occupying memory. Sure, the OS can somewhat manage these, but I'm finding that the longer I keep my phone "up" (without a restart), I just get a HUGE list of apps on the background pane, that are somehow still occupying memory. Yes, the OS can terminate the processes on its own, but I've found it's not doing that optimally. It was horrible on my 3GS, after half a day or so without a reboot, it would drop down to less than 20Mb of free RAM available, and games and Safari would crash back down to the Springboard until the OS cleaned up memory. When I would go into the background pane and manually close out all of those apps, the free RAM would go back up to the typical 110-130Mb free that my 3GS had before iOS 4. My iPhone 4 has double the RAM of the 3GS, so it's not as big of an issue on it now, but I have seen where even it will go from 230-240Mb free with a restart to down under 70Mb as the OS "manages", or fails to manage the processes running in the background.
     
  21. virx macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    #21
    I guess Apple wanted it to work well on iPhone 4 and did not care much about other devices. It works exceptionally well for me on iPhone 4 so far, I love how I can read a book, then go check mail, surf web and it takes a split second to get back to iBook without any loading. On the other hand I hate how iBook 1.1 works on iPad, it takes much longer to load a book now when you open it, dictionalry does not work with any free books created by calibre. I wish I could revert to iBook 1.0 on iPad and make app store application stick to it without displaying available "upgrade".
     
  22. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #22
    Imagine a fire that goes out when you leave a room and turns on again when you re-enter.

    Then imagine one that's on all the time you're out of the room, but Mr OS is standing over it with a bucket of water ready.
     
  23. Robbadore64 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2008
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #23
    LOL.

    I can see how it could be bothersome to some. I'm not one that goes through several different apps in one day (maybe ten?). I've obviously only had my iPhone 4 for about 23 hours but so far I really love the implementation and so far I haven't minded going in and manually closing out a few apps (I haven't had bad performance yet that makes me do this but I don't think iMovie needs to be running or even paused in the background).

    Guess we'll have to wait and see exactly how it's implemented on the iPad. But comparing my jailbreak/backgrounder on iPad and the implementation of multitasking on the new phone, I'll take iOS 4, but that's me.

    Hope they implement it in a way that suits your needs this fall. Or a way to turn it off while you're doing real work and don't want to be bogged down by crap apps running...
     
  24. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #24
    What they should do is have the apps that actually multitask quit to the background. The developer can implement this if they choose.

    The apps that don't, don't get put into the background they just simply close.
     
  25. silverblack thread starter macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #25
    Thanks for sharing your thoughts. In my case, I much prefer the jailbreak/backgrounder than the iOS4 (in the current version). Here are my reasons:

    For multitasking to work in iOS4, it relies on the app itself to be capable of multitasking. For example, Pandora works, but not FStream (another internet radio app). Even for something like Skype, I can't continue a conversation when the app is "in the background" (because Skype limits you from doing that). To me, this is nothing new, as iTunes was a multitasking app since Day 1. The new iOS4 is merely Apple opening its doors to allow 3rd party apps to take this advantage. But developers do have to re-write their apps, for them to function like Pandora or iTunes.

    The jailbreak/backgrounder on the other hand is what I call true multitasking. It allows *any apps, in their current version, to fully run in the background as if it is running on screen. Of course, the downside is intense processor and battery usage, but you only use it when you need it. And most importantly, you get to decide what and when to multitask!!!

    Anyway, my iPhone OS is back from 4.0 to 3.1.3, thanks to the SHSH on Saurik's server. I am a happy camper once again :D
     

Share This Page