Technology iPhone OS 4 event April 8th

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
These 20% of time is an investment.

Because these projects pay off the most. It's about creativity and innovation management. Google's organization culture is all about supporting innovation.
If you're working on projects that are already set and planned by other people to fit some specifications it kills most innovation.
 

S O F I

Administrator
Staff member
^3M was the first company to give their employees play time up to 20% of their work. So, Google didn't come up with this idea, but it's a very good idea, and Google ran with it.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
AppleInsider | Inside iPhone OS 4.0: Multitasking vs Mac OS X, Android

A long read about multitasking.
I pasted a small portion of the article

Multitasking in iPhone 4.0 vs. Android

Apple was certainly aware of how Google had designed Android's multitasking model, and there's no evidence that Google patented the concept of services in its publicly documented, open source operating system. So the fact that Apple didn't clone Google's entire model for multitasking indicates that Steve Jobs wasn't just blowing hot air when he said Apple had studied the problem and devised its own approach to multitasking that it believed to be better.

At the same time, some aspects of Apple's new multitasking APIs are very similar in approach to Android's. According to an overview of the differences in Android and iPhone 4.0 by David Quintana, the "apparent multitasking" of iPhone 4.0, which Apple calls "Fast App Switching," is nearly identical to Android's app suspending concept described above.

When you switch from one app to another in iPhone 4.0, the previous app is held in memory but all activity is frozen. As noted earlier, this isn't really multitasking in the sense of desktop OS multitasking, but rather just an illusion that multiple apps are all running, when they're really not. They're just ready to run again as soon as you switch back: hence the name Fast App Switching.

Before Apple announced this mechanism, many iPhone programmers had expressed the idea that the system didn't really need "multitasking" as much as a "saved state" concept that would allow users to rapidly switch between apps. That's exactly what Fast App Switching does.

Just as with Android, iPhone 4.0 can reclaim memory by saving and then terminating apps that are frozen in the background, so when the user returns, the app can be reopened to the same place it was when the user quit. However, unlike Android, iPhone 4.0 presents a simple way to expressly quit a running app without needing a process management utility like TasKiller.

Because hitting the Home button no longer exits the app, Apple has now made a touch and hold shortcut that presents a red minus badge on running apps that can be used to quit them and remove them from the task tray of running apps, just like the Home button used to do. There's no manual management of apps and systems processes that could result in unanticipated problems for users.

Incidentally, this type of "apparent multitasking" is also what Microsoft plans to use in Windows Phone 7 at the end of the year. And once again for emphasis: this aspect of multitasking isn't really about running multiple apps at once as occurs in a desktop environment, it's about leaving them in memory so you can quickly switch between them.

More Efficient Multitasking in iPhone 4.0

Going beyond the apparent multitasking of Windows Phone 7, iPhone 4.0 will also support a specific set of tasks in third party apps that users will actually want to continue in the background after they leave an app. This is conceptually similar to Android's services, but is implemented in a new way. As Quintana writes, on iPhone 4.0 "background processing is however vastly different than Android."

A primary difference, Quintana notes, is that there is no concept of services in iPhone 4.0. Apps don't provide a background client/server component. Instead, Apple developed a set of rules that apps must follow in order to continue doing tasks after the user switches away from the app.

The idea of apps continuing to work after the user switches away is not new to the iPhone; it's only new to third party apps. Apple's Phone app already does this, as the company has long touted in its ads. With a call in progress, the user can hit the Home button and browse the web or look up a contact or check email while the Phone app remains on the call.

The same thing happens with the iPod app, which can continue to play music. SMS and Mail continue to get messages in the background and so on. However, this would quickly become a problem for users if all of the scores of apps they installed were all consuming resources without restriction as they checked for messages and streamed updates and continued other operations in the background.

In order to balance users' desires to do multiple things at once against users' expectations that their phone would work responsively for a reasonably long period of time, Apple defined a number of background tasks that third parties can implement, and set up rules that ensure these tasks are performed as efficiently as possible.

Reasons for Multitasking Differently

In addition to increased efficiency, Apple's approach to regulated multitasking allows for simplified compatibility between devices like the iPhone 3G, which won't support multitasking, and more recent devices that do. Apps that take advantage of the new APIs simply request the ability to do things in the background, so if the hardware doesn't support it the requests are just denied by the operating system.

Google's approach with services requires a new model of client/server components. If Apple had copied that, developers would have to create one set of apps for older devices and an entirely different code base of apps for newer ones, a complex and problematic transition step given that Apple already has a vast library of existing titles in the App Store.

Additionally, much of what developers do with services on Android is already handled by the iPhone OS with Push Notifications. So implementing an Android-like services architecture for iPhone 4.0 would suggest to Android developers wanting to port their apps that they should do so using services rather than the more efficient Push Notifications, creating a problem like the one that exists on the Blackberry, where push features are largely ignored and go unused.

Unified development tools: Clang, LLVM and Xcode

This also all leads to the conclusion that Apple's design for incorporating multitasking features in iPhone 4.0 is all about doing what's best for the iPhone OS platform, rather than trying to create compatibility or similarities with other platforms that do things differently.

It should come as no surprise that Apple is not at all interested in making it easy or simple to port apps between the iPhone OS and other platforms. Doing so would only water down the advantages of the iPhone OS and encourage developers to aim at a lowest common denominator that worked across platforms rather than aspiring to take full advantage of the unique features of the iPhone OS.

This is the same reason why Apple has no interest in supporting Flash or Java as a meta-platform on the iPhone, and also why the company does not want to support third party efforts to create development tools that output iPhone apps. The Flash Professional strategy Adobe hoped to roll out will not offer its users the ability to support iPhone 4.0's multitasking features, Adobe would not be able to rapidly add these features as soon as Apple would like, nor would it necessarily even be in Adobe's interest to add them.

Apple's new prohibition of iPhone 4.0 development in languages other than C, C++ and Objective-C was largely seen as an attack on external development tools like Adobe's Flash CS5. However, observers including Rainer Brockerhoff have since noted that Apple's focus on C languages likely has more to do with the company strategy for optimizing iPhone OS development using Clang.
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
So it's more like "almost multi-tasking" but not really and they want to make it sound like it's better (predictable, isn't it?).
However according to Apple limiting is "going beyond" and instead of being unable to successfully introduce multi-tasking they "didn't clone Google's entire model for multitasking indicates that Steve Jobs wasn't just blowing hot air when he said Apple had studied the problem and devised its own approach to multitasking that it believed to be better."

They couldn't implement the full multi-tasking feature because it wouldn't be compatible with earlier Iphone apps. Now Apple limits even themselves lol.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
^

"hence the name Fast App Switching"

"Before Apple announced this mechanism, many iPhone programmers had expressed the idea that the system didn't really need "multitasking" as much as a "saved state" concept that would allow users to rapidly switch between apps. That's exactly what Fast App Switching does."

"The idea of apps continuing to work after the user switches away is not new to the iPhone; it's only new to third party apps. Apple's Phone app already does this, as the company has long touted in its ads.

The same thing happens with the iPod app, which can continue to play music. SMS and Mail continue to get messages in the background and so on."

Lets try to comprehend what you read
 

Casey

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Then you agree that this is a straight up LIE



Because that and this:



are NOT the same thing.

They have done what is in the second picture and claimed it is the first picture, but it isn't.

That's like me eating some dough, and then eating some tomato puree, and then eating some olives and saying I ate a pizza.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
Taken from the original article

"the "apparent multitasking" of iPhone 4.0, which Apple calls "Fast App Switching," is nearly identical to Android's app suspending concept described above."

"There was no technical limitation that kept third party apps from multitasking; the restriction was artificially imposed by Apple to simplify and optimize the performance of its mobile devices. By jailbreaking the iPhone, users can activate unregulated multitasking among third party apps. However, this results in battery life and performance issues the user will need to manage manually."

"Google created multitasking for Android that works very differently than multitasking on a desktop system. In fact, they're so different that its almost confusing that both are referred to using the same word."

Oops
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
"Google created multitasking for Android that works very differently than multitasking on a desktop system. In fact, they're so different that its almost confusing that both are referred to using the same word."

Oops
Yes, they are different. You don't normally close apps and don't have a task manager. Also switching between apps is different.
However I can listen to the web radio, have a weather app downloading data, a download manager downloading files from my Dropbox account and browse the web at the same time with great performance. I don't see how it's worse then. I agree I used to miss the good old "shutting down" thing but I have a task killer if I need to and I don't even use it now as it doesn't change performance or battery life for me. And guess what - my phone lasts for about twice as long as last gen Iphones while being faster, smaller, allowing me to do more and multitask since always and a few times cheaper.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
^ Good for you

Lets not start this whole "Apple are liars" argument. It's an argument that goes nowhere.
I did not sense any negativity towards Android in this article, it was simply a comparison of the differences between the platform and once again it's you two screaming bloody murder.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
The Contacts info is stored in the on-board memory.
It's not as complicated as it seems - all you would need to do is have your Contacts (OS X) or Google contacts synch through iTunes.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
^ I bet, when the bugs are sorted out, the Android OS will run better on the iPhone. heh


Hey, Casey, I heard Google opened up their wallets again and bought some chip start-up ... I wonder what the strategy is.. hmmmm
 

Casey

Well-Known Member
Staff member
^ I bet, when the bugs are sorted out, the Android OS will run better on the iPhone. heh
Doubtful, not when Apple optimize their software to camouflage their underpowered hardware, as already mentioned. Besides which, you need at least 4 dedicated hardware keys for the full Android experience. Having to make do with one button is for children.

Hardware AND software wise, devices like the HTC Incredible and EVO 4G really show up the iPhone for what it really is - a backwards, underpowered, crippled, lacking piece of shit.
 

masta247

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Iphone is inferior even to mid-end Android devices. And I mean Iphone 3gs.
Iphone 3g and earlier are technically inferior to probably all Android devices that have ever been on the market with their arm 412mhz processors lol.

No doubt that they want to buy out ARM since Apple is probably the last company using their old-school chips. Not counting some other single devices (mostly old though).
It's Intel, Qualcomm and Samsung which count in mobile processor battle now.

Is it me or Apple makes shitloads of terrible business decisions lately?
 

S O F I

Administrator
Staff member
^It's you.

Let's put it this way. There are probably more than a thousand analysts whose sole day job is monitoring Apple and advising large institutional investors whether to invest in Apple or not. If you look at Apple's stock price in the last few days/weeks/months you'd know they're on top of their shit.

Techies like you and to a lesser extent, Casey Rain (because he can also see behind the scenes of just tech stuff, most of the time) fail to see the big picture and too often focus directly on tech specs. Sustainable competitive advantage does not solely depend on having the best-functioning product.
 

S. Fourteen

Well-Known Member
No doubt that they want to buy out ARM since Apple is probably the last company using their old-school chips. Not counting some other single devices (mostly old though).
It's Intel, Qualcomm and Samsung which count in mobile processor battle now.

The ARM architecture is licensable. Companies that are current or former ARM licensees include Alcatel-Lucent, Apple Inc., Atmel, Broadcom, Cirrus Logic, Digital Equipment Corporation, Freescale, Intel (through DEC), LG, Marvell Technology Group, NEC, NVIDIA, NXP (previously Philips), Oki, Qualcomm, Samsung, Sharp, ST Microelectronics, Symbios Logic, Texas Instruments, VLSI Technology, Yamaha and ZiiLABS.

ARM processors are developed by ARM and by ARM licensees. Prominent examples of ARM Holdings ARM processor families include the ARM7, ARM9, ARM11 and Cortex. Examples of ARM processors developed by major licensees include DEC StrongARM, Freescale's i.MX, Marvell (formerly Intel) XScale, NVIDIA's Tegra, ST-Ericsson Nomadik, Qualcomm's Snapdragon, and the Texas Instruments OMAP product line.
From wiki

not only phones but they are found insides many other mobile devices - what this means, if it were to go through, is that Apple would profit from all the products with ARM architecture. So when you buy your Evo, you're paying Apple. At the same time Apple would have a significant head start in CPU development. Pay close attention to Intel numbers folks.
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top