Why did it take Appleso long to add multitasking to the iPad?

Discussion in 'iPad' started by Stirolak123, Dec 1, 2010.

  1. Stirolak123 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    #1
    Anyone else think this should have been a feature from day one and probably turned off a lot of potential customers from the get go due to the fact like bloggers or business ppl? I mean now I can exit atomic web browser and all my tabs including what I was writing in this forum remains open the same. This is a necessity for many people.

    Also, I noticed some emial programs not the main email but like craigslist programs still haven't got multitasking down and u have to fettle everything u wrote if u exit in the middle of an email.
     
  2. sapporobaby macrumors 68000

    sapporobaby

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    Location:
    3 earth minutes from your location....
    #2
    Dude. This has been discussed until the cows come home. Your time would be better served if you did a search of all the topics on this.
     
  3. AAPLaday Guest

    AAPLaday

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Location:
    Manchester UK
  4. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #5
    If you were being cynical, you could say it was to give the iPad a mid-life boost: Steve Jobs said it was like having a new iPad...
    The real reason, though, is that they decided to unify the iOS devices at 4.2, and it took this long to get 4.2 complete and out of the door
     
  5. Stirolak123 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    #6
    Ok I get it guys, I just think it is a lot more important of a feature on the ipad than iPhone and apple should have got it on the iPad first if not equally at the same time. Anyway, here is another question. When I use the atomic web browser and I multitask and don't touch it for a while everything has to be reloaded and all the tabs web pages reload and the multitask breaks. Is this common in all apps or only certain ones? And why?
     
  6. Zcott macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Location:
    Belfast, Ireland
    #7
    When you close an app its contents are saved in memory. If another app comes along and needs more memory, it'll kill the oldest-closed apps to get some memory back. You won't notice any result in the primary app you're using but when you come back to the app you closed, it'll have to re-make the state of the app.

    Part of the reason the iPad could do with more RAM.
     
  7. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #8
    Atomic's tabs take up valuable RAM. If you run other apps afterwards, they may need the RAM that Atomic was saving those tabs in. Thus reopening Atomic will cause those tabs to have to reload.

    * Zcott got there first!
     
  8. Stirolak123 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2010
    #9
    Ok thanks, but what if I start using a bunch of different apps. Will all of them start saving to memory and if a new one that needs lots of ram comes along does it take away the multitask in all the previous ones or one by one starting from the first one I exited?
     
  9. Pressure macrumors 68040

    Pressure

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
  10. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #11
    I'm quite happy they didn't wait for a unified 4.2 to release the iPad. It was perfectly usable before.
     
  11. rikbrown macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2010
    #12
    For god's sake.

    When we didn't have 4.2/multitasking yet people complained that we didn't have it.

    Now we have it, people - void of things to complain about - need to complain that we used to not have it.

    Get in the present, and get your multitasking on man!
     
  12. sammich macrumors 601

    sammich

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2006
    Location:
    Sarcasmville.
    #13
    Both wrong, not very wrong though.

    It was stated in Apple's 'pillars' of iOS multitasking: backgrounded tasks only have 10 minutes to complete whatever they want or the process will be suspended. In most apps that aren't multitasking ready, or don't implement some state saving on close (which was the faux-multitasking solution pre-iOS4), they will start afresh as if they were closed.
     
  13. Zcott macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Location:
    Belfast, Ireland
    #14
    They only ’shut down' when a memory-intensive app like Safari or PvZ needs the memory. And they're not completely shut down - the app saves the exact state of the app so you can resume it but it'll have to re-make the session. And I think it starts by closing your oldest-used app, the one that has been closed the longest.
     
  14. MythicFrost macrumors 68040

    MythicFrost

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Australia
    #15
    The simple thing is iOS 4.2 wasn't ready even for iPhone yet alone iPad, they'd have had to wait until now before releasing the iPad.
     
  15. kenypowa macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Location:
    somewhere
    #16
    the thing is, it takes Apple 3 years to allow users to change their wallpaper. You should be grateful uncle Steve added multi-tasking after only 10 months.
     
  16. Kenndac macrumors 6502

    Kenndac

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    #17
    Actually, you're wrong and the people you were quoted were right.

    90% of "background" apps get suspended and stored in RAM, and are awoken again when the app is brought back to the front. It works the same as your Mac going to sleep, only on a per-app basis. In this state, apps consume RAM but can't actually do anything. However, because they're in RAM they can be awoken again instantly and carry on from where they were.

    If an app wants to actually *do* something in the background, it can request so when it's about to be put to sleep. In this case, the app gets a certain amount of time to perform its operation as you said.

    See the developer documentation here for more information on the subject. Pertinent quote:

     
  17. andrewsd macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Location:
    USA/BAYERN(bavaria)
    #18
    awesome

    That reply in the context I read it as in my head totally would have made my day if my day was not already made by sledding with my nieces.. Angry Birds and don't you all know people only search if they are on the university of google webpage, not actually with in a forum board.
     
  18. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #19
    I don't understand why iOS doesn't reserve some flash memory (say 1Gb) and then move the apps from memory into flash memory instead of killing them completely when it's running short: That would allow apps to be retained for longer and come back as they were suspended, albeit a bit slower.

    Maybe it's due to the characteristics of the flash memory (i.e. not suitable for repeated writes / rewrites) but it would be a way of somewhat overcoming the RAM problem.
     
  19. Kenndac macrumors 6502

    Kenndac

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    #20
    The applications are already stored on flash memory to start with. Storing another copy of them on there doesn't seem smart.
     
  20. Hawkeye411 macrumors 68000

    Hawkeye411

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Location:
    Canada EH!!!
    #21
    Who knows. It's all speculation ... Guess they were busy working on other stuff??
     
  21. poloponies macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #22
    And how come there's no camera? And what's with the orientation switch? Why can't this play Flash? It's too heavy! And why can't we read in bright sunlight? And why no Android? And what, we have to use iTunes????
     
  22. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #23
    You wouldn't be storing another copy of them per se - it would be the current state of the registers, memory, stack, etc to allow them to be restarted from where they left off.
     
  23. poloponies macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #24
    The real answer is that 4.2.1 was installed from day 1 but Jobs waited until 10 million were sold before he secretly enabled it.
     
  24. mstrze macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #25
    Generally, Apple wants users to have a fantastic experience using its products. They didn't feel that multitasking 10 months ago with the current OS was that 'fantastic experience'. Plain and simple.

    Very, very, VERY rarely will it be that Apple releases something that's just not there yet. They want all the kinks worked out before the public gets the product or software, as opposed to other companies that tend to rush products to market and end up fixing and correcting for years to get it right.

    Other recent examples would be the lack of 3G on the original iPhones which could have easily been accomplished...and I believe it's also the current reason why AppleTV doesn't display 1080p natively: the rest of the infrastructure is just not there to support it as a viable (read: problem-free and 'fantastic') rental/sales option right now.
     

Share This Page