This coming from a site which was saying for years that Apple would be releasing a mobile phone and tablet (until they eventually did). Every damned WWDC/Macworld they would reiterate the rumor until it happens.
Furthermore, its quite clear the article has no credibility when the author writes garbage like "Gaming has largely failed to take off on other mobile platforms because titles are limited to simplistic experiences, as they must either run in a poorly-performing layer of abstraction (such as .. Java/Android Dalvik runtimes...). Apparently the writer has never heard of the NDK, and isn't aware that there is no reason why Dalvik couldn't eventually run as fast as native code. Furthermore, I doubt the author has spoken to a single Android gaming developer..
I used to work at an Apple Premium reseller, and I've heard enough crap from Appleinsider that has been OBVIOUSLY wrong throughout the ages. They don't have any credibility, and I'm curious why people treat them with such respect. In fact, I'd say its pretty obvious they own stocks in Apple so CANNOT be a neutral party.
Yes, multitasking might come eventually. But from experience, you'd have to be crazy to trust these guys. The fact is, everyone is thinking the same thing anyway (because its a MAJOR complaint about the iPad), and if it doesn't happen, AppleInsider will just shrug it off as delayed (as they normally do). AppleInsider Rumors are nothing more than educated guesses generally, or based on information which is available to every Apple reseller. I've never seen any information proven correct though that suggests it was leaked by an "insider"
For an Apple-centric site, their mobile interface is quite annoying. It obscures ~1/3 of the content until you begin scrolling and then the nav bars disappear until you stop scrolling only to reappear. To make matters worse, clicking the button to use the full site dumps you on the main page, not on the article you were reading.
I noticed the same thing this morning. I like the amount of care they put into the interface, but a few things are wrong. First, when you click through to an article it doesn't go directly to the article. Second, the issue you mentioned. Its very distracting to have the interface fading in/out when trying to scroll.
I noticed the same thing this morning. I like the amount of care they put into the interface, but a few things are wrong. First, when you click through to an article it doesn't go directly to the article. Second, the issue you mentioned. Its very distracting to have the interface fading in/out when trying to scroll.
I noticed the same thing this morning. I like the amount of care they put into the interface, but a few things are wrong. First, when you click through to an article it doesn't go directly to the article. Second, the issue you mentioned. Its very distracting to have the interface fading in/out when trying to scroll.
I really like how their main site is too wide to read on the iPhone, even in landscape. You need an Android phone with it's text re-formatting to actually read it. Oh, the irony.
Indeed. If multitasking comes, apps will still have to interact with everything else through well-defined, public APIs; the only place they'll have free reign will continue to be their own folder. Also, I'd expect to see some quotas enforced to guarantee that, say, background Pandora really does only take x% CPU, probably within a static amount of memory.
I'd expect to see some quotas enforced to guarantee that, say, background Pandora really does only take x% CPU, probably within a static amount of memory.
I think it would be much smarter for Apple to just give the iPhone user some sort of notification when there isn't enough memory to run the app he's trying to open. Kinda like the classic Mac OS for those that remember.
What is a user supposed to do with that sort of notification? When I launch a program, I mean to run the damned program. I don't want to be told "I can't run this, go close something else first." This would be a huge step backwards in iPhone OS usability.
I don't care as much about background apps such as Internet radio streaming (sorry, especially since Pandora isn't available in Canada, I really can't care; I found that when I could use last.fm I didn't use it that much, either, which is why I didn't subscribe—there's no value in it for me). I suspect that most phone users don't, either.
I'd be much more interested in a better notification queue, local notifications and alarms, and things like that than the ability to run programs (like Pandora) in the background.
I'd be much more interested in an API to allow searching inside an application's data than running programs in the background.
I'd be much more interested in quick ways to switch between two or three programs that I use regularly without having to go to SpringBoard than running programs in the background.
My needs aren't typical, but I think that the need to run streaming audio programs in the background is, for now, even less typical.
I actually agree, but it would be better than forcing developers to adhere to a static memory quota.
Ultimately there isn't any simple answer for the iPhone multitasking issue. Maybe Apple should create tools that let developers create "background modes" of their apps, which would take up less memory and dynamically cede control to other apps with higher priority, like the Phone.
A static memory quota might be better than what we have now. Sometimes my app gets punted at 2 MB, sometimes it can use 20. Users with jailbroken phones seem to have particular problems with memory, especially when they try to take photos.
My needs aren't typical, but I think that the need to run streaming audio programs in the background is, for now, even less typical.
You're just violently wrong about this.
Go over to the App Store and have a look at Pandora's reviews, if you want to see 10,000 or so users who disagree with you about the importance of background streaming.
Pandora is among the most popular apps for a reason (quick survey, how many other iPhone users reading this thread haven't used it at least a few times, if not regularly?) and the lack of background streaming is easily the #1 complaint.
Generalized multitasking, meh, but there is no technical reason why allowing a single background-streaming operation should interfere with other applications, and there's no conceivable reason why Apple couldn't allow apps to do it. They're just being, for lack of a better term, weird about it.
Let's pretend for a second that you're right and that there's about 10,000 people who want background streaming, that's 0.01% of the total number of estimated worldwide users (75 million) on the iTunes platform. A percentage that small is too small for me to be "violently wrong". I suspect that 80% of users have never even heard of Pandora on or off the iPhone.
1. See that "/us/" in the URL? The Pandora Radio app is ONLY available in the U.S. This is confirmed when I went to the "Pandora Media, Inc. Web Site" link:
"We are deeply, deeply sorry to say that due to licensing constraints, we can no longer allow access to Pandora for listeners located outside of the U.S. We will continue to work diligently to realize the vision of a truly global Pandora, but for the time being we are required to restrict its use. We are very sad to have to do this, but there is no other alternative."
So, off the top, only about 50% - 55% of all iPhone OS users can care about background streaming with Pandora due to the geographic limitations involved. (Call it about 41 million possible users.) We're still only up to 0.03% of possible users if we use your number.
2. Fortunately, we've got better numbers available on that same page. At the time that I looked at it, there were 48,998 ratings for the current version and 361,593 ratings for all versions. Only three ratings/reviews are shown (a 1-star with a rant about medialets and people who complain about the lack of backgrounding; two five star that make no mention of backgrounding). Let's pretend, though, that all 361,593 ratings complain about backgrounding (despite clear evidence that they don't). When we do a quick number crunch we're still only at 0.9% of possible users talk about this and about 0.5% of worldwide users.
We could double or even quadruple the percentages that I've calculated here for alternatives to Pandora (like last.fm), and I'd still be right that the need to run streaming audio programs in the background is a mark of a highly atypical iPhone OS user. Objectively, I am not wrong about this. Your quick parenthetical survey is also asking atypical users what their opinion is. I stand by my statement that my needs aren't typical and the need for backgrounded streaming audio is, for now, even less typical.
From a UI/UX perspective, the management of backgrounded audio streaming applications is something that isn't easy. How do you stop it? How do you start it again once stopped, or do you have to visit the streaming application again? Do you conflate it with the iTunes double-home-tap? If the streaming app is stopped and iTunes isn't playing something, what should double-home-tap do?
There are apps (mostly games) out there that can detect if you're playing music in iPod; if you are, they mute their own music (and sometimes their sound effects); other times, they pause your iPod player to play their audio—and they may restart your iPod audio afterwards. How does a background audio app interact with this in such a way that doesn't require changes to these existing software titles? Should streaming apps be able to hook into iPod media play capabilities?
Every single one of these questions has to be answered—and more—and it needs to be done with as little negative impact on existing software as possible.
I'd like to see all of this happen, but don't delude yourself about your typicality in the population of iPhone OS device users.
Furthermore, its quite clear the article has no credibility when the author writes garbage like "Gaming has largely failed to take off on other mobile platforms because titles are limited to simplistic experiences, as they must either run in a poorly-performing layer of abstraction (such as .. Java/Android Dalvik runtimes...). Apparently the writer has never heard of the NDK, and isn't aware that there is no reason why Dalvik couldn't eventually run as fast as native code. Furthermore, I doubt the author has spoken to a single Android gaming developer..
I used to work at an Apple Premium reseller, and I've heard enough crap from Appleinsider that has been OBVIOUSLY wrong throughout the ages. They don't have any credibility, and I'm curious why people treat them with such respect. In fact, I'd say its pretty obvious they own stocks in Apple so CANNOT be a neutral party.
Yes, multitasking might come eventually. But from experience, you'd have to be crazy to trust these guys. The fact is, everyone is thinking the same thing anyway (because its a MAJOR complaint about the iPad), and if it doesn't happen, AppleInsider will just shrug it off as delayed (as they normally do). AppleInsider Rumors are nothing more than educated guesses generally, or based on information which is available to every Apple reseller. I've never seen any information proven correct though that suggests it was leaked by an "insider"