Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How come most interesting articles here are lifts off of appleinsider... I seldom see macrumors reports in appleinsider articles, once in a blue moon, but it's very regular here. I am not saying spreading the word around is necessarily bad but a little "original research" would be appreciated. This is not wikipedia. :)

It's because 'Prince Mclean' makes stories up out of nowhere. It's why I stopped reading AppleInsider.

Are they still predicting the death of the Mac Mini?
 
Maybe apple can spend a little less time on morality policing the appstore and a little more time enforcing the guidelines that say apps are supposed to save and restore their state where appropriate.

IIRC they don't restore state because they can't restore state on a streaming media connection, plus you'd probably want Spotify to keep streaming audio in the background anyway - not pause it.
 
Glad I skipped the 3GS. Can't wait for the new iPhone!

iPhone OS will support multitasking. That doesn't preclude the 3G from running the new OS and multitasking itself.

By skipping the 3G, you've relegated yourself to using a painfully slower device than the 3G. I can't stand using my old 3G for any length of time after having owned a 3G; the keyboard lags, apps open slower, etc, etc.

I'm interested if the new hardware will be sexy enough, and the OS "open" enough to lure me back from Android and the Nexus One.
 
You know what, I've never thought of it that way.

One rogue Android app and you could release a lot of information about yourself... Android will list what info and services the app uses and accesses but the danger is there.
Good post, thanks! :)

But the danger's there with Apple, too. Haven't we already seen "rogue" iPhone apps that stole your phone number and gave it to marketeers?

I'm not sure Apple's scrutinizing apps that closely that you can just assume nothing bad will ever get past them.
 
IIRC they don't restore state because they can't restore state on a streaming media connection, plus you'd probably want Spotify to keep streaming audio in the background anyway - not pause it.

I'm speaking in a general sense. The developer guidelines say we are supposed to return the user to where they left off (if it makes sense to do so). Many apps don't do that. It would be nice if Apple enforced it (where it makes sense). It would also be nice if Apple rejected apps that subject you to pointless splashscreens (beyond Default.png) that simply make it take longer to get back to where you were. If they did these things, multitasking (or some OS-level taskswitching mechanism) would be less important.
 
All the recent talk made me forget the most important app I have installed on my Nexus One, WaveSecure for Android.

With this single app installed, every power on, call made, SMS sent can be remotely viewed by me and I can also remote wipe or acquire data, lock or locate my handset and if someone steals my phone and puts their sim in, WavesSecure logs the phone number of the sim and time/date the device was powered on.

Possibly the best reason I can see for multitasking and such a well done 'background process' I completely forgot I had it running. ;)

I'll second the praises for WaveSecure! It puts MobileMe's FindMyiPhone to shame in some regards, and it's FREE. (What's the catch, there?)

But MobileMe FindMyiPhone also runs in the background, silently and unnoticed by the user, so it's not just an iPhone thing.

My one concern with WaveSecure is that the admit to a 2% increased battery drain with the app running in the background.

There's another product, MobileDefense, that's not quite as robust in terms of features, but it's zero battery drain when you're not actively tracking the phone.
 
As its fairly technical you might need to review a few pages with plenty of nummbers. But you start forgetting the full list of stocks they listed and again need to refer to email. By the time the matter is answered, you've flicked between Safari and Mail many times and wonder why it was so hard. If true multitasking was enabled its likely the flicking would have been much faster and the task would have been much easier to complete.
Sorry to give you bad news, but Safari and Mail runs in the background already.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)



lol, the first two things you want are on the 3gs, the third won't be on the 4g, and the fourth is software that the 3gs will get.

It boggles my mind that people are still saying the 3gs was not a substantial upgrade. It was far, far more significant than 2g to 3g (though that was important too). I don't think anyone who has spent significant time with both models would ever say that.

Exactly.
I have a 3G. At night I use my son's latest gen iPod touch, since it is so much faster. It's especially useful when surfing.
 
You can't bash iPhone 3GS. You can't. It's by far the most stable and complete of the three iPhones. I've owned all three and I have almost zero complaints about the 3GS. The first two I had a fair amount of glitches constantly. Maybe I just had bad luck on the first two, and really good on the third, but I kind of doubt that.

Sure, the 3GS didn't offer any major features that made upgrading a must, but I don't regret it a bit. Especially since I was able to sell my 3G for $400 which means I spent all of $100 out of pocket to upgrade to the 32GB 3GS.

If the fourth iPhone offers the same amount of stability with even a few minor upgrades I'll be a happy camper. I put my phones through the ringer, so it makes sense for me to upgrade every year, and if I can do that with $100-200 out of pocket each year I'm okay with that.

As far as multitasking, I'll be glad to see it added, but it's not that big of a deal to me. The speed of the 3GS is good enough to where I can switch between apps pretty dern fast anyway.

I'd like to see some type of notifications system implemented like the Pre has.
 
Can you please take just a moment to explain to me how that's simpler than "press the one button on the device?"

You can do that too. Just hold down the "one button on the device" for a couple of seconds and you get the message "backgrounding disabled." When you release the home button, the app closes completely. Done. Simple.
 
It's because 'Prince Mclean' makes stories up out of nowhere. It's why I stopped reading AppleInsider.

Are they still predicting the death of the Mac Mini?

Well, thank Prince then because appleinsider direct feed make up for more than 30% of mr front page news relay. :rolleyes: Does Danny "make up" stories too?

I don't ever recall them predicting the death of mac mini btw.
 
This part tells me this rumor is probably false. This probably refers to the Mac OS X Activity Monitor, which is exactly the kind of complex (for the average user) thing Apple is moving away from with iPhone OS. They will eventually have to deliver some form of multitasking, on some level, but I just don't see them going down this road.

I don't know if you can draw that conclusion.
It says "leverage"- not "duplicate the mac os x implementation of activity monitor"
 
You're thinking of the "old Apple", this is the "new Apple".

See the old Apple wouldn't release a product until it was ready for prime time. Timetables be damned, investors be damned, profits be damned. The old Apple would hold the iPad until 4.0 was released so it could do everything it was planned to do.

The new Apple not so much. Their stockholders expect too much from them and Apple is doing what they can to make them happy first instead of make the consumer happy first.

I remember the very buggy iPhone 2.0 release that was nowhere near ready. It had obvious bugs the moment you started using it but Apple released it anyway. We all got to beta test it in production. I remember wasting money on the .Me service that was pure crap. If a company besides Apple released MobileMe the exact same way Apple did it they'd be bankrupt right now as it was nothing but a total disaster.

I remember Apple promising push notifications in 2.x that didn't come until 3.0 a year later. The "old Apple" would never promise and not deliver, they'd just delay the release of the product until it was ready.

The "new Apple" released a half-assed iPad to make sales with no compelling new features over a touch or iPhone. It is in essential just a bigger screen. The "old Apple" would of waited until 4.0 was ready to be demoed and showed off the iPad with lots of new features. Maybe they didn't want to promise features they have planned in 4.0 but might not be able to implement because they'll run out of time like they did with push. See the old Apple worked off product readiness so they could release the product when it's done. The new Apple focuses on release dates and quarterly earnings so they have to release updates/products with features lacking.

true
nevertheless old apple was almost bankrupt
new apple...well we know it
so i guess one cant have everything
 
Push notification would require a custom VoIP setup such that someone phoning you would get routed to a server which then instead of directly connecting you would send a message to Apple's server which then sent a message to your iPhone... [lots of other stuff]...

No, it wouldn't. Or, at least, it might be similar in a conceptual sense but at worst no different from the way VOIP normally works. Please explain precisely why you think it would have to work this way, given the current state of the iPhone API and other relevant systems.
 
Just a few points to think about...

How useful is the feature to double-click the home button to bring up the iPod controls from anywhere on the iPhone to you?

Take that metric, multiply by the number of apps you have on the phone, and that is how useful multi-tasking will be to you.

Multi-tasking is about more than saving state in an app, switching apps faster, and running apps in the background.

1) Saving state can be a nice feature, but it isn't appropiate for every app in every situation. For example, Settings should almost never save state. You don't wan't to always have to navigate backwards to change a different setting than that which you changed last time, do you? On the other hand, if you are in the middle of setting up a mail account you don't want to lose your place if you need to switch apps.

Another example for me is the USA Today app. When I open it for the first time that day, I want it to start at the main page as if I were picking up a new paper (which it does). Alternatively, if I want to google some information or copy/paste content from the article, I want it to keep my place in the article while I switch apps. Currently, the iPhone can't distinguish what behavior I would prefer since there is no differentiation betwen closing an app and merely switching to another.

2) It is more than just switching apps faster, although that is nice. If you use the double-home-button-click for iPod controls feature, what makes it so useful? How is it different than just closing your current app and switching to the iPod?

It is about preserving your train of thought. When one app launches another on the iPhone (like loading an address in google maps), what happens when you close that secondary app? You don't return to the original app, you start from scratch at the home screen. Why do you think apps started including their own bundled (safari) browsers? When you switch to another app, you put your train of thought on pause and start a new one. It is easiest for our minds to recall the original train of thought when he have clues - switching back to an app as opposed to continually re-launching from the home screen.

Why do you think tabbed browsing caught on so well? If you come across a new subject while browsing, you can open it in a new tab. When you are done exploring that topic, you can simply close the tab and you immediately return to your original train of thought. As your short-term memory manipulates all the information you take in from the secondary tab, your original train of thought associated with the original tab is moved to long-term memory. When you close the secondary tab, the information associated with the first tab must be moved back into short-term memory from long-term memory. It is much more efficient to do so when your brain has cues - in this case the first tab which holds the last page from your original train of thought.

It feels much more natural when an application stays open when switching to another app because when you close the second app, your first app is immediately available, right where you left it, allowing your brain to recall that train of thought without missing a beat. It's not as fluid when you always return to the home screen.
 
No, it wouldn't. Or, at least, it might be similar in a conceptual sense but at worst no different from the way VOIP normally works. Please explain precisely why you think it would have to work this way, given the current state of the iPhone API and other relevant systems.

You don't know anything about VoIP and SIP do you? Please look up how SIP works.

SIP can work without any servers in between. It can be entirely peer to peer. ie. one SIP user to another SIP user across the internet only, or even inside your own network without getting out of your firewall.

Push notifications work with ONE server, Apple's server. To initiate an incoming call with a normal provider you'd go through these steps...

1) Landline user rings your number.
2) Phone company connects with the VoIP provider - (Vonage, SIPGate etc)
3) VoIP provider checks where to route call based on which handsets are registered (ie. online) with them
4) They initiate a session with your handset(s) and your phone rings.

With Push Notifications add...

2a) VoIP provider sends push notification to Apple
2b) If there's other non-Apple Handsets, do 3) and 4) from above too.
2c) Apple send push notification to iPhone, hopefully promptly
2d) Wait for user to respond to notification
2e) Launch your custom 3rd Party application
2f) connect with iPhone

That's an aside to the fact it's all custom built crap for the iPhone and it doesn't use SIP, STUN (for tunnelling through firewalls) or any of the standards built for VoIP that are part of modern telephony. And it routes all your calls through Apple.

Sometimes it's a good idea to dump the standards and do your own thing if it's truly better. But in this case it's totally not.
 
As far as multitasking, I'll be glad to see it added, but it's not that big of a deal to me. The speed of the 3GS is good enough to where I can switch between apps pretty dern fast anyway.

Personally, I think anyone that says multitasking isn't a big deal to them, hasn't used a phone that multitasks. It makes a big difference in the function of the phone that push notifications only partly cover.

Apple wouldn't be even considering multitasking (if it's true) if their weren't benefits to multitasking over push notifications.
 
How useful is the feature to double-click the home button to bring up the iPod controls from anywhere on the iPhone to you?

Take that metric, multiply by the number of apps you have on the phone, and that is how useful multi-tasking will be to you.

Multi-tasking is about more than saving state in an app, switching apps faster, and running apps in the background.

1) Saving state can be a nice feature, but it isn't appropiate for every app in every situation. For example, Settings should almost never save state. You don't wan't to always have to navigate backwards to change a different setting than that which you changed last time, do you? On the other hand, if you are in the middle of setting up a mail account you don't want to lose your place if you need to switch apps.

Another example for me is the USA Today app. When I open it for the first time that day, I want it to start at the main page as if I were picking up a new paper (which it does). Alternatively, if I want to google some information or copy/paste content from the article, I want it to keep my place in the article while I switch apps. Currently, the iPhone can't distinguish what behavior I would prefer since there is no differentiation betwen closing an app and merely switching to another.

2) It is more than just switching apps faster, although that is nice. If you use the double-home-button-click for iPod controls feature, what makes it so useful? How is it different than just closing your current app and switching to the iPod?

It is about preserving your train of thought. When one app launches another on the iPhone (like loading an address in google maps), what happens when you close that secondary app? You don't return to the original app, you start from scratch at the home screen. Why do you think apps started including their own bundled (safari) browsers? When you switch to another app, you put your train of thought on pause and start a new one. It is easiest for our minds to recall the original train of thought when he have clues - switching back to an app as opposed to continually re-launching from the home screen.

Why do you think tabbed browsing caught on so well? If you come across a new subject while browsing, you can open it in a new tab. When you are done exploring that topic, you can simply close the tab and you immediately return to your original train of thought. As your short-term memory manipulates all the information you take in from the secondary tab, your original train of thought associated with the original tab is moved to long-term memory. When you close the secondary tab, the information associated with the first tab must be moved back into short-term memory from long-term memory. It is much more efficient to do so when your brain has cues - in this case the first tab which holds the last page from your original train of thought.

It feels much more natural when an application stays open when switching to another app because when you close the second app, your first app is immediately available, right where you left it, allowing your brain to recall that train of thought without missing a beat. It's not as fluid when you always return to the home screen.

Very well said, and I concur with what's written above.

I think all of the peeps who say: "why do you need multitasking anyway?" Are only looking at Multi-tasking through the lens of: "oh, these guys just wanna run Pandora in the background."

There's another reason why we want Multitasking which Eso talks about above:

Fast app switching.

How annoying would it be on the desktop/notebook if you had to open up the browser, then close it and open up pages, then close that, open up keynote, then close that, and open up Bento.

Guess what folks, that's the way it is right now on the iPhone (and iPad). This is why *I* want multitasking. A better way to navigate through applications.

w00master
 
Personally, I think anyone that says multitasking isn't a big deal to them, hasn't used a phone that multitasks. It makes a big difference in the function of the phone that push notifications only partly cover.

Multitasking is the only other major improvement I can think of that would improve the 3Gs.

There are other a few other improvements that I can think of, but multitasking is the only major one I can think of right now that would improve the 3Gs.
 
It's because 'Prince Mclean' makes stories up out of nowhere. It's why I stopped reading AppleInsider.

Are they still predicting the death of the Mac Mini?

I think McClean/Dilger can be a little blind but he does know his stuff. His stories always steer pro-Apple though which means you can't quote him with 100% factual accuracy.

For instance, he's spoken out many times against multitasking yet AI posts this article which goes against all he's said. Ironically he is partially credited with the post. Go read his post on multitasking and the Tech Night Owl podcast where he talks about it.

For myself and others who wanted multitasking, who knew it was possible, it has shown the line between those who are Apple fans and fanboys. Along with Dilger, there have been many on this forum that have spoken the same line and never managing to criticize Apple. A blind love that is so easily had is worthless to whomever it is offered to.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.