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.
OS X 10.9 to Bring Enhancements to Finder, Safari, Multiple Monitor Support, and Multitasking
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well the dock itself is in fact a "launchpad". If anything, Launchpad feels like a forced way to bring an iOS feel to OS X. If you wanted a launcher of all apps you could always just add your Applications folder to Stacks and voila. If they really want to keep Launchpad, I don't think I should see two icons for Safari, two for iPhoto, etc etc. Just seems unnecessary.
If you say it's a good thing, why not toss some app icons on the desktop and status bar. That would provide even more ways to open Safari
Some people do that. It's called aliases on Mac OS X and shortcuts on Windows. I personally use Spotlight to launch apps not in my dock but that is muscle memory from before Launchpad existed. My Dad likes Launchpad. Launchpad shows ALL of your apps versus the dock which only shows a limited number. If you don't like it, then don't use it. But calling it unnecessary just because you don't want or like it is just stupid. The world does not revolve around your preferences.
I wonder how the new multitasking system will work...What things won't be able to run in the background?
I'm having visions of a return to cooperative multitasking which I'm sure more than a few old timers here remember quite well (and somewhat with disdain).
resolution independet OS please!!
the current backward resolution system is killing our rMBP iGPUs.
the current backward resolution system is killing our rMBP iGPUs.
I use a desktop. Battery life saving is useless for a computer permanently plugged into the mains. What I don't like about it is the possibility of my apps freezing unless they're being used. I like to run plenty of stuff in the background.
That is already in use, ie you can trigger an event at a given time in the future and that event can be a script.
It bears repeating: Does anyone really think Apple would disallow all background apps from accessing resources?
The rumor is that processes in the background which are consuming resources needlessly won't anymore. This is what makes it like iOS. If Fusion Drive is smart enough to work, this will be smart enough to keep your stupid render running.
Control freaks who would prefer to janitor every app they have and tell it just how much to run in the background have too much time on their hands.
The rumor is that processes in the background which are consuming resources needlessly won't anymore. This is what makes it like iOS. If Fusion Drive is smart enough to work, this will be smart enough to keep your stupid render running.
Control freaks who would prefer to janitor every app they have and tell it just how much to run in the background have too much time on their hands.
I'm certain the guy you are responding to has no idea what a multitasking / multithreaded operating system is. However he is right that the current model for user multitasking on iOS is a little to restrictive.
Mac Book AIR is probably the best example of a product that left the starting gates positioned wrongly even if it was a great concept. It took awhile for Apple to refactor and reposition the AIR into a profitable high volume product. It is now of course very successful. The point here is that it could have been a rough patch for the company but their strength in other products pulled Apple through. The best way for Apple to avoid rough patches is to have new products coming at fairly regular intervals.
The ability to keep any app running in background under user control.
Which is in a nut shell the problem, at times only the user can make the rational choice to run in background. Beyond that let's say you want to build an app that collects data form some instrument, say every minute or every five, iOS is less than ideal for this due to the multitasking restrictions.
True but that doesn't mean iOS can't be improved. In fact it means that Apple has to carefully consider how to best improve the OS with each new rev. There is a good argument that they need to look into multitasking that allows for more user control. By the way that doesn't imply running hundreds of user apps at the same time as might happen on a desktop system. Rather they need to have a way for a user to designate that an app runs in background.
I agree this interest on touch on Mac OS is really stupid. The use cases are so different that it is unbelievable that people would ask for such features. Now new ways of gesture recognition wold be great as long as I don't need to reach across the desk to touch the screen.
There are a whole host of issues with touch on the Mac. It might work for an iMac setup something like a tablet but in the whole it is a big fail
Chromebooks are far for interesting once the OS is freed up.
Every company hits rough patches. Growth isn't perfect and as such can lead to problems of its own. But the real issue is this, even the best conceived products can be positioned wrongly. Sometimes that results in a complete failure like the Cube or a amazing reboot of a concept.
Mac Book AIR is probably the best example of a product that left the starting gates positioned wrongly even if it was a great concept. It took awhile for Apple to refactor and reposition the AIR into a profitable high volume product. It is now of course very successful. The point here is that it could have been a rough patch for the company but their strength in other products pulled Apple through. The best way for Apple to avoid rough patches is to have new products coming at fairly regular intervals.
I agree with you that it would be a complete disaster in OS X.
I also can see your point about the lack of multitasking in iOS when I use my iPad (although others may disagree, if they use it differently).
But on my iPhone, the lack of multitasking drives me crazy and I basically use it only occasionally nowadays.
I had pre-ordered an HTC One to replace my Google Nexus, which I still find myself using much more than the iPhone, but cancelled it to see what Google will unveil in May. If the Google Nexus 5 is unveiled and is as ugly as the Nexus 4, then I'll just go to the HTC One and the iPhone 5 will be my back up. Frankly, if Apple doesn't do something to improve iOS soon (real multitasking and real customization (including giving us a choice of keyboards), the 5 may be my last iOS phone.
Unless they sneaked this past me you can't do this in iOS.
By the way feature parity with Mac apps would go a long way to securing iOS and it apps in the future. Even something like notes that started out on iOS has more features in its Mac variant. Very frustrating.
Yes! Yes! Yes!
The biggest complaint I hear from people who feel that the pixel-density on their 27" monitors is too hight, but can't change the resolution to something more comfortable. It's weird, but people are fighting over the old 24" monitors.
And touch. Really, Apple can do touch well hopefully and keep the Mac Book competitive.
Eh no, but this thread is about OS X 10.9. I certainly thought you where talking about that.
That's "power-user" feature?
I hope it doesn't suck if it's ported to OS X. The first thing I did when I installed OS X Lion/ML was to disable automatic termination.
The article seems to indicate that non-foreground apps would be "de-prioritized", not terminated.
I can't think of a good reason why non-foreground apps should be terminated, either.
That's nice. But OSX runs on laptops as well, where battery life is a concern.
Besides just being "smart" and only freezing apps that aren't doing anything (as well as following how the dev sets the app up), I wonder if the OS will also handle things differently if it knows that the computer is running off of battery versus plugged in (or laptop versus desktop).
And besides background/foreground, the OS can make a distinction between apps that are background and ones that are hidden. As well as apps that are hidden but still doing things like playing audio or doing other functions.
Heck, I'm surprised that nobody has complained that unless the print monitor app is up front, their printer will stop in the middle of a page.
Indeed, if they go up stage at wwdc and just say tabbed finder and walk away, i'm happy
Ok, I may be feeding a troll here, but what multitasking processes do you find more compelling on Android than iOS? Personally, maybe I'm a "light user" but I don't really use multitasking all that much on my phone or iPad.
But what exactly does freeze mean then? An application that is running in the background and is doing nothing already gets 0% CPU time. If it is doing something, like downloading a file for example, you certainly would want it to continue doing that.
But what exactly do you win by that? I agree that if this system is implemented on OSX it must have some sort of user controlled interface,in which the user either allows the app to pause or continue running "old school" for a lack of a better term.
If you're using an instrument you can have a companion app sort of like Nike+
It definitely can be improved,its far from perfect and i'm the first to acknowledge it,for example since theres facebook integration with iOS why not use the messages app for facebook as well? the issue is most people won't know how to use it and then it will be the multistakinggate in which Apple ef'ed up the multitasking,still besides those very specific cases where more would it be such an advantage having an app run in the background instead of simply being paused? the thing they could improve is when you're using for example Whatsapp? and you get a message,allow the app to refresh so it loads the new text to the conversation and then pauses again.
Absolutely,they can for example use the cameras which since they're HD they're probably good for facial and gestures recognition and that sort of stuff.
The Air is the best example of Apple doing something,figuring out what they did wrong and getting it right and profitable. Agreed,this "drought" of releases isn't good for Apple as it puts too many products all at the same time and people won't be able to buy them at that time and it allows the competitors to launch products, I still believe an iPad in March,iPhone in July and iPod's in September/October would still be the best lineup for Apple with iMacs/MBP/MBA/MP in between would provide optimal exposure and time for consumers to buy everything(from an Apple perspective of course) and keeps the media going for them.
You can do that??
Does it require using terminal?
Does it require using terminal?
That's "power-user" feature?
I hope it doesn't suck if it's ported to OS X. The first thing I did when I installed OS X Lion/ML was to disable automatic termination.