Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next version of OSX could be terrible

U

UBS28

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Oct 2, 2012
2,893
2,340
OS X 10.9 has "improved" multitasking similar to iOS. I prefer real multitasking on OS X over the multitasking on my iPad & iPhone based on my experience.

If the Haswell MBP is released with 10.9, then it is likely that Mountain Lion won't be supported for this machine. Thus your MBP could be stuck with an iOS like multitasking.
 
By iOS type multitasking do you mean applications not actually being open but suspended until you go back?

You gotta be trollin'. This obviously won't be the case for a Macbook. Haswell and the amount of ram is far beyond capable of handling multiple programs at once silly goose.
 
johnnnw said:
By iOS type multitasking do you mean applications not actually being open but suspended until you go back?

You gotta be trollin'. This obviously won't be the case for a Macbook. Haswell and the amount of ram is far beyond capable of handling multiple programs at once silly goose.
Click to expand...

Based on what are you claiming this could not be implemented for OS X? I'll give you a quote.

"According to one source, Apple has been testing a new multi-tasking system for OS X that is similar to the quick-app-switcher function on iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches. The multitasking feature will be functional for applications in the background, according to this person. Additionally, Apple could use app-pausing technologies from iOS to pause background application processes in OS X. This is significant as full performance could be given to foreground apps, which could help optimize battery life on Apple's notebook computers."

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1576677/
 
Let them test. If it sucks, I'm sure they'll work on it until it works, or give it up. If 10.9 is another Lion, I'll just skip it... like I did with Lion.
 
UBS28 said:
Based on what are you claiming this could not be implemented for OS X? I'll give you a quote.

"According to one source, Apple has been testing a new multi-tasking system for OS X that is similar to the quick-app-switcher function on iPhones, iPads, and iPod touches. The multitasking feature will be functional for applications in the background, according to this person. Additionally, Apple could use app-pausing technologies from iOS to pause background application processes in OS X. This is significant as full performance could be given to foreground apps, which could help optimize battery life on Apple's notebook computers."

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1576677/
Click to expand...

This would be an absolutely massive mistake. Laptops are for getting real work done. I would be SHOCKED if Apple created a app pausing system for a full powered computer.
 
There are some apps that this would be great for- the built-in Mail app, for instance, or the iMessage client. Push notifications are a pretty smart system.

I definitely do not see them pushing this on every app. It makes no sense. The ability to multitask (i.e. compressing video in the background while authoring in another program) is an absolutely vital part of a standard workflow.
 
johnnnw said:
This would be an absolutely massive mistake. Laptops are for getting real work done. I would be SHOCKED if Apple created a app pausing system for a full powered computer.
Click to expand...

No it won't. They could leave an API for developers who want that feature in their apps. Not all apps need to be running 24/7.
 
If this is going to be implemented in OS X 10.9 it will be an option and most likely will be build into Energy saver, if on battery you could choose best performance or longest battery life, in no way this is needed on desktops like the iMac, Mac Mini and MacPro.
 
johnnnw said:
This would be an absolutely massive mistake. Laptops are for getting real work done. I would be SHOCKED if Apple created a app pausing system for a full powered computer.
Click to expand...

The app pausing feature if it's indeed true would most definitely be user defined and switchable/configurable (similar to dynamic GPU switching on MBP with discrete GPU). It's a good way to save battery consumption (not having to exit or relaunch the apps, two process that are actually power inefficient).
 
What does this have anything to do with Haswell? ML won't be supported but not because of the reasons (or lack thereof) you state. I'm a CE major and technically, no OS has true multitasking as in parallel processing. Computers still execute code line by line regardless of how many programs you are running. We don't even know what those rumors mean and much less if it's true. We haven't seen 10.9 yet. Stop trolling.
 
Doesn't this kind of 'multitasking' already take place a little bit in Mountain Lion? Don't some apps actually quit in the background to free up resources?
 
Last year's MBPs didn't ship with Mountain Lion. This year's schedule appears to be similiar, so you will probably get 10.8 preinstalled and a gift code for 10.9. If that's the case, you can decide whether to upgrade or not.
 
[MOD NOTE]
Thread moved to the OSX forum since this is really about how OSX handles multitasking. I also updated the title to be a bit more accurate, this thread is not about Haswell or MBPs but how OSX handles multitasking.

[Member thoughts]
As I take off my moderator hat, here's my $.02 on the subject.

I think Apple is moving closer to making OSX behave and/or look like iOS though I don't think they will throw out the tried and true multitasking that's currently employed in OSX in favor of the state freezing mechanism of iOS. The state freeze method is in place because you can only have one foreground app visible in iOS, not so with OSX.
 
justperry said:
Cheers, have to look into it, until now I didn't see this behaviour or just missed it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I wouldn't have noticed it either if I hadn't read about it. This automatic termination isn't much of a resource saver as it is a 'de-clutterer' of things in your dock and tab switcher.
 
sammich said:
Yeah, I wouldn't have noticed it either if I hadn't read about it. This automatic termination isn't much of a resource saver as it is a 'de-clutterer' of things in your dock and tab switcher.
Click to expand...

Looks like the app must accept it as well, the linked hint only mentions a couple of apple apps. Its interesting since I was unaware of the feature and its not really promoted on apple's osx page as well.
 
justperry said:
Examples please.
Click to expand...

It's been around since Lion. If you leave certain applications open with no windows, the app will quit, for example, TextEdit and Preview. If you want to try it, open Preview and then open a PDF (it only works if you open a PDF first). Then close the PDF. Then switch to a different application. Preview will automatically terminate. It tries to anticipate what you're doing. That's why I suppose it doesn't automatically terminate if you don't first open and close a PDF.

You can read about it in the developer guidelines. Slightly OT, I've read a number of developer guidelines (even though I'm not a developer) and each time an OS comes out they basically read like an explanation of why it was OK for Apple to do what it did. They've always reminded me of how president's pre-emptively have lawyers write out legal briefs explaining how some controversial thing the president is going to do is legal.

From:

https://developer.apple.com/library...rammingGuide/CoreAppDesign/CoreAppDesign.html

Automatic and Sudden Termination of Apps Improve the User Experience
In OS X v10.7 and later, the use of the Quit command to terminate an app is diminished in favor of more user-centric techniques. Specifically, Cocoa supports two techniques that make the termination of an app transparent and fast:

Automatic termination eliminates the need for users to quit an app. Instead, the system manages app termination transparently behind the scenes, terminating apps that are not in use to reclaim needed resources such as memory.
Sudden termination allows the system to kill an app’s process immediately without waiting for it to perform any final actions. The system uses this technique to improve the speed of operations such as logging out of, restarting, or shutting down the computer.
Automatic termination and sudden termination are independent techniques, although both are designed to improve the user experience of app termination. Although Apple recommends that apps support both, an app can support one technique and not the other. Apps that support both techniques can be terminated by the system without the app being involved at all. On the other hand, if an app supports sudden termination but not automatic termination, then it must be sent a Quit event, which it needs to process without displaying any user interface dialogs.

Automatic termination transfers the job of managing processes from the user to the system, which is better equipped to handle the job. Users do not need to manage processes manually anyway. All they really need is to run apps and have those apps available when they need them. Automatic termination makes that possible while ensuring that system performance is not adversely affected.

Apps must opt in to both automatic termination and sudden termination and implement appropriate support for them. In both cases, the app must ensure that any user data is saved well before termination can happen. And because the user does not quit an autoterminable app, such an app should also save the state of its user interface using the built-in Cocoa support. Saving and restoring the interface state provides the user with a sense of continuity between app launches.

For information on how to support for automatic termination in your app, see “Automatic Termination.” For information on how to support sudden termination, see “Sudden Termination.”​
 
UBS28 said:
OS X 10.9 has "improved" multitasking similar to iOS. I prefer real multitasking on OS X over the multitasking on my iPad & iPhone based on my experience.

If the Haswell MBP is released with 10.9, then it is likely that Mountain Lion won't be supported for this machine. Thus your MBP could be stuck with an iOS like multitasking.
Click to expand...

More than likely this new multitasking will only be for fully sandboxed software from the app store;if it is real and not just a rumour.
 
Odd, that's not what I'm hearing:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/mac_os_x_10_point_nine_rumors/

Of course, OSX never stopped being a system for power users, for me at least. If anything, the gestures and mission control introduced in Lion were a real benefit. A few weeks back, I was testing a system that involved connecting to a number of different servers (4-6 terminal sessions open to each, monitoring various things) and all organised into quickly accessible screens plus additional screens for organising test results and so on.

This was better and more productive than the Windows 7 PC and three monitors at the office. My biggest fear has been that they might really dumb it all down in the future, so I hope the above article is correct.
 
Maybe it is just me but that is not how I interpreted that rumor at all...

If you read the original rumor from 9to5mac they mention a new multi-tasking UI that will in some way resemble the multi-tasking UI built into iOS (not sure if that is a good thing but windows management in OS X could use some work so I'm glad they are thinking about it)

Completely separate is the 2nd part of the rumor suggesting that there may be the ability to pause background apps. I don't think Apple is stupid enough to pause every app in the background even if you are using it. This will likely be restricted to new or updated apps anyway because I would imagine the developers will need to enable something like this. And in many cases it would be nice to have my laptop run as if the only thing I am using is the browser even though I have 20+ other apps/windows open so I don't run down the battery so fast. I'm not a huge fan of iOSification (hate it actually) but if you stop thinking about iOS and just think about how this might be useful for a laptop it doesn't actually sound like that bad of an idea depending on how it is implemented.

Personally I'm really excited to see what Apple comes out with in the next few months (for both OS X and iOS). I think it is the first time in a long time that I have no idea what to expect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back