Print 109 comment(s) - last by textkills.. on Mar 24 at 3:44 AM

Multitasking in Symbian OS 5.0 (on the S60)  (Source: Maximum PC)

Both the Palm Pre (shown here) and the Symbian OS 5.0 (above) support full multi-tasking. The iPhone does not. That offers some gaming and security benefits for the iPhone, but prevents some useful apps. Full multi-tasking is rumored to be coming with iPhone OS 4.0 this summer.  (Source: TechSource)
Might Apple be cooking up a counter to its competitors by at last bring multi-tasking to its smartphone?

If it can't sue its rival smartphone makers out of existence, it appears that Apple plans to at least catch up to them.

According to 
AppleInsider, Apple will finally be bringing a "full-on solution" to multi-tasking with iPhone OS 4.0 which is set to debut this summer.  Presumably that means that third-party apps will finally be allowed to run in the background on the phone.  The sources were scant on details about how it would remedy performance, battery life, and security issues, but they did say that the multi-tasking would use an interface similar to that in the Mac versions of OS X.

Apple's iPhone is among the best-selling smartphones and is second in market volume only to the incredible successful Blackberries from Research in Motion.  Apple's massive developer community and gigantic collection of apps make a phone that would otherwise be seen as just beneath top hardware offerings seem like the top of the pack.

However, Apple has slipped behind the bleeding edge of the competition, even as its app offerings have flourished.  Its competitors -- Palm, Symbian, Research in Motion, and Google (makers of Android OS) – all support multi-tasking in their smartphone operating systems.  Apple's OS X distribution on the iPhone artificially prevents third-party application backgrounding (multi-tasking), only allowing push notifications as of iPhone OS 3.0.

There have been a few major exceptions.  Currently, the iPhone's phone, SMS, email, iPod, voice recorder, Nike+ apps and a handful of others can run in the background.  This means, for example, that you can use apps and play music at the same time (but only using Apple's built in music player).

Apple has previously stated that backgrounding apps represents a security risk.  The iPhone's OS kills apps when you accept calls or return to the home screen, rather than sending them to the background.  That makes it harder for spyware, adware, or viruses to run on the phone without the user's knowledge.

The security comes at a cost though -- third-party apps that are available at all times (run in the background) like instant messaging, location-aware apps, internet radio, etc. are not able to be supported unless you "jailbreak" your iPhone, running software to hack the OS and remove Apple's restrictions.

One of the big problems is that multi-tasking could hurt gaming on the iPhone if resource management isn't implemented perfectly.  Currently the iPhone rivals the PSP Go and Nintendo DSi as a mobile gaming platform.  Its smartphone rivals though have been unable to muster much gaming success -- titles tend to be limited by either inefficient multi-tasking and/or by requiring the apps to be run by abstraction layers, such as Adobe Flash/Flash Lite, Microsoft Silverlight, or Sun Java/Android Dalvik runtimes.

Despite these shortcomings, many iPhone users have demanded multi-tasking.  Multi-tasking was rumored to be coming both in iPhone OS 2.0 and iPhone OS 3.0, but never came in full form.  Thus its reasonable to be wary about whether iPhone OS 4.0 will truly bring multi-tasking to the table at last.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

for iPad as well?
By cochy on 3/11/2010 10:58:03 AM , Rating: 3
I would imagine this update coming to the iPad as well. That would remedy a rather large feature hole. Can't claim it can fully replace netbooks without multi-tasking.

RE: for iPad as well?
By BZDTemp on 3/11/2010 11:21:24 AM , Rating: 5
A lot more is needed for iPad to replace a netbook. As long as Apple controls what apps you can run the iPad severely handicapped compared to a Netbook. Apple is actually able to pull applications you that was previously approved by them and remove the app from you iWhatever.

Considering we are talking about a company which once used the idea of Big brother to represent it competitors I find their way of business to be the definition of ironic.

RE: for iPad as well?
By pequin06 on 3/11/2010 11:31:36 AM , Rating: 5
Jobs knows better and is just wanting to take care of you.

Welcome to iState

RE: for iPad as well?
By quiksilvr on 3/11/2010 9:58:50 PM , Rating: 3
Traitor! Your heart is as black as your turtle neck!

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By nvalhalla on 3/11/2010 12:30:17 PM , Rating: 5
Really, so Apple will let any program onto the app store? They don't control what people can have based on what Apple thinks is best? Are you sure about that?

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By axias41 on 3/11/2010 2:59:53 PM , Rating: 2
So Opera on iPhone is not user friendly?

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By dark matter on 3/12/2010 2:25:06 AM , Rating: 2
You pompous little toerag Pirks. Are you saying the average Joe gets confused at the supermarket as there is just too much choice and too many alternatives for them to handle?

And there was me thinking the success of the iPhone stems from all the choice and alternatives in the app store. You might want to tell Jobs that you know all about average Joe as currently one of Apples advert strapline is "there is an app for pretty much anything".

Why not make your own App pirks that tailors to the average Joe so that it restricts choice and freedom of alternatives from their lives so they can all live in your nirvanic utopia of being told what is good for them.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By themaster08 on 3/12/2010 4:28:14 AM , Rating: 2
Probably not user friendly enough, otherwise why would they prohibit it?

Have you ever even used the Opera Mobile browser? It is extremely user friendly, looks fantastic and is a joy to use. Even on my lowly Nokia 5800XM, it just feels like a quality product.

One simple open standard/open source based browser like Safari is more than enough and it makes platform more simple and hence more user friendly.

The whole Internet Explorer debacle just springs to mind here. So by your logic Internet Explorer is also more than enough as it makes Windows more simple hence more user friendly?

Opera is probably not worth the trouble because its pros do not outweigh its cons as an iPhone browser.

So what you're basically saying is that Apple doesn't see the need for another broswer so they're saying "we've decided you're not having it". What was all of this about then?
There's a huge principal difference between Big Brother and Apple's App Store policy. While Big Brother watched you and decided what you should or should not do depending on what HE, the Big Brother, deemed necessary, Apple only deals with customer or client complaints. Apple is not the Big Brother in sense that they don't care what people run UNLESS people start complaining about some app. Then Apple may remove it. See the difference?

I'm sorry but your arguments conflict. Apple IS big brother when it comes to the App Store. You implied it yourself in your contradicting, somewhat laughable arguments.

Stop trying to support Apple when you don't have a leg to stand on.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By sbtech on 3/12/2010 8:44:52 AM , Rating: 1
s IE open source? No?

Neither is Safari. It is based on an Open Source engine. Rather than me putting links, you can google yourself.

Pirks, I get pissed off by Apple, not because it is following a type of customer lock-in(also known as vendor lock-in) strategy. Nor is it because it makes fancy hardware and asks for a premium on them. Hey, they are just product life cycle and pricing strategies. Many companies do it. For example, even with cloud computing technology, the lack of interoperability standardization means customers will get locked in - kind of a step backwards towards the old mainframe style business models. Apple indeed has an admirable relationship marketing model in place, it is something to even learn from.

What pisses me off is, that Apple claims to be a freedom loving company, and still following this business model. This tarnishes Apple's brand image, to me, because of the inherent duplicity.

Do not get me wrong, I don't think there is anything wrong with the lock-in model - from a marketing perspective. It sometimes proves even beneficial to the customer. Just because one has choices does not mean one can always setup a heterogeneous environment using components from different sources and make it perform better all together. This model is not even something innovative - a classical marketing technique followed in many industries. A business opting for IBM lock-in is aware, but sees the advantages over the disadvantages before doing that.

But Apple's marketing communication is misleading, and you and I, as customers, should realize that, see through the veil, and realize the model you will be getting into. Once realized, one may still opt for Apple, and it may even serve your needs better than anything else.

A lot of post from Apple lovers seems to point out the opposite. They don't seem to realize the business model of their vendor i.e., Apple. They seem to be even mislead by the said vendor's marketing communication.

Just the way I perceive this, but it could be wrong.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/2010 11:50:20 AM , Rating: 1
It is based on an Open Source engine
And IE isn't, that was my point.
Apple claims to be a freedom loving company
Where did they claim this?

RE: for iPad as well?
By aj28 on 3/14/2010 4:28:48 PM , Rating: 3
Neither is Safari. It is based on an Open Source engine. Rather than me putting links, you can google yourself.

I wasn't going to jump into this mess, but I do think it's fair to say that Safari is open source, not just based on an open source engine. Below is a link to the WebKit homepage, and if you download the nightly builds you will see that it is not just the engine that is distributed open source, but the entire browser.

RE: for iPad as well?
By djc208 on 3/11/2010 3:29:02 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot anything that competes with services they offer on the phone itself (media players, google voice, other app stores). Anything they don't see the point in, anything that seems to offend the sensabilities of the guy or girl who's reviewing it. Hell, last week it was wi-fi finder apps. Certain "adult" apps were removed, but not all of them based on some twisted logic they made up based on dice rolls or bribes.

So I guess it's not really Big Brother in that we don't know that they're actively watching everything you do, but the only other place I know of that practices that kind of subjective sensorship is China, so I guess Apple isn't Big Brother, it's Communist China.

Nope, still doesn't make me want an iPhone.

And while I'm in rant mode, if the iPhone OS is based on OSX, which is SO secure, how come Apple's excuse for not allowing background apps is that it's a security issue. I thought there were no security issues in OS X? If the phone can't safely handle background tasks how safe is the mother desktop OS?

I can't wait for the Toyota moment to come for Apple. The day when the rest of the users realizes that Apple is just a flasher version of every other tech company out there.

Ok, I'm done, rant over

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By djc208 on 3/11/2010 8:50:24 PM , Rating: 1
As long as Apple's strict app submission policy stays in place iPhone will keep its momentum.

I think that's an oxymoron. Why would any developer want to spend time and energy developing for a platform that might decide, with no good cause or justification, it doesn't want your software on it's product.

I imagine you'll find that just like with their bigger siblings, the more open and free OSs like Android and Windows will quickly outstrip Apple because they don't need permission from Google, or anyone else, to develop an app. Add in the much larger selection of phones and devices that are turning to it and it will be no different than with Windows vs. OS X.

YOU on the other hand are pretty well served by more niche more geeky phone like Android or WinMo.

No, I just like products that treat me like I'm smart enough to decide what is and isn't appropriate for me to look at or do with a device I'm paying large sums of money to own. Keep playing at the kiddie table, the rest of us are going to do adult stuff.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By dark matter on 3/12/2010 2:34:00 AM , Rating: 2
Because the average Joe is confused easily (your words) and sooner or later someone else is going to come along at doing a better job than Apple in fleecing them.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/2010 11:58:55 AM , Rating: 1
Agreed, Apple can't be eternal leader. Even pyramids crumble eventually.

RE: for iPad as well?
By themaster08 on 3/12/10, Rating: 0
RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/2010 12:04:52 PM , Rating: 1
It was not about his opinion being worthless in general, it was more from the point of view of Apple. I meant "who cares from Apple or any other big business?"

His opinion is just like mine, both are worthless for Apple or MS, the only thing that matters are opinions of a large mass of consumers, and they have already spoke with their wallets.

RE: for iPad as well?
By themaster08 on 3/13/2010 4:45:06 AM , Rating: 2
His opinion is just like mine, both are worthless for Apple or MS

Well my opinion to MS wasn't worthless, because Windows 7 was my idea!

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/13/2010 7:08:04 AM , Rating: 1
great now get back to work sinofsky :)))

RE: for iPad as well?
By Bateluer on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By Keeir on 3/11/2010 8:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
arbitrary rules

Probably not arbitrary.


Rules that best serve Apple's current corporate goals rather than rules designed to be consisent, best for the customer or best for the particular product.

RE: for iPad as well?
By SpinCircle on 3/11/2010 12:30:32 PM , Rating: 2
Unless you want to install something that Apple hasn't approved for the app store or don't want you to use because it might compete with something they have in the app store, whether it is better than their app or not. And, don't even think about trying to install something they don't approve of unless you jailbreak your phone... which they don't approve of either.

RE: for iPad as well?
By 91TTZ on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By dark matter on 3/12/2010 2:37:08 AM , Rating: 2
Didn't you notice all the -1 reps your posts have?

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/2010 1:08:40 PM , Rating: 1
RE: for iPad as well?
By Smilin on 3/12/2010 4:47:12 PM , Rating: 2
LOL poor priks you try so very hard. That one you linked also has this gem under it:

That was the first time I ever uprated Pirks. Kudos.

Lets cut to the chase though shall we. Click on your own hyperlinked name and you'll find something like this:

Pirks has posted a total of 3882 comments at DailyTech, the average comment rating was 0.81.

RE: for iPad as well?
By crystal clear on 3/13/2010 2:06:13 AM , Rating: 2
Pirks has posted a total of 3882 comments at DailyTech, the average comment rating was 0.81.

Ratings dont earn anybody here a living, rather we should be rating ARTICLES here on DT.

Its not the contents of your post rather "whose side you are on".

With Pirks the user experience on DT is unique ! only found in the iPhone & ofcourse the mighty iPad.....

The love hate relationship that apple bashers have for Pirks is a unique experience similar to the iphone & the mighty iPad.

Pirks may one day claim he reinvented entertainment on DT

A day without Pirks is him Priks or what you like, the fact is "they cannot do without him".

its really works !

An apple a day & Pirks keeps the boredoom away !

RE: for iPad as well?
By crystal clear on 3/13/2010 2:15:39 AM , Rating: 2
In fact I posted a special comment exclusively on Pirks,here is the link below-

Who is/are Reader1 & Pirks ?
By crystal clear on 3/5/10, Rating: 2
By crystal clear on 3/5/2010 11:23:56 AM , Rating: 2

Conclusions & Analysis-

Apple,Jobs,Pirks,Reader1 are like trigering devices that sets off an explosion.

When Pirks comments,he appears to be like a hybrid of Steve Ballmer & Steve Jobs both trigering devices that set off explosions on D.T.

My guess... they are D.T. employees paid to lite the fire !

RE: for iPad as well?
By BZDTemp on 3/11/2010 5:25:39 PM , Rating: 1

Obviously you have not been following this very closely. For example Apple is not allowing Flash just as they do not allow all sorts of emulators. There is more to this issue than just Apple taking away erotic content or their double standards shown when doing so.

Why should any company be allowed to mandate what it's customers do with their products. Imagine a car company demanding no one has sex in their cars because someone complains about such activities. Sounds stupid for sure but in principle that is no different from what Apple is doing.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: for iPad as well?
By dark matter on 3/12/2010 2:43:28 AM , Rating: 2
"User experience is number one priority", until of course something goes wrong with your product and then they make you sign disclaimers to keep your mouth shut to get your money back or just plain deny the problem exists.

The reason they don't have flash is because it would ruin their app store model. Perfect business strategy if you ask me. But don't believe the hyperbole about it being in the interest of the consumer.

RE: for iPad as well?
By Pirks on 3/12/2010 1:12:52 PM , Rating: 1
don't believe the hyperbole about it being in the interest of the consumer
I still think consumers benefit from it since native code/native games are faster and eat less battery than Flash crap.

RE: for iPad as well?
By melgross on 3/11/2010 12:52:45 PM , Rating: 1
When you consider that netbooks can't actually run most of the apps that can, theoretically, run on them, the iPad doesn't really have much of a limitation there, as the apps that do run, and there will be hundreds of thousands by the end of the year, will run very well.

I've got a Toshiba NB205, with 2GB RAM, and quite frankly, it sucks. It's still one of the fastest netbooks out there, but even browsing isn't really fun.

RE: for iPad as well?
By darkhawk1980 on 3/11/2010 1:26:36 PM , Rating: 1
Sadly, you are sorely mistaken. Your 'netbook' is not one of the fastest by any means....Go get an HP Mini 311. That is a netbook on steroids, and will actually even play games while lasting nearly as long. Quite frankly I have fun playing WoW on it. Everything runs on it that runs on my desktop, not nearly as good, but easily still playable.

The iPad has more of a limitation than the netbooks even do. While netbooks don't have a desktop processor, it is more than capable of doing most tasks, even on the go. The iPad? It's a large ipod. Personally, the best game that someone could make for the ipad, is a picture of a bullseye, so people can senselessly have a place to aim when they beat themselves in the head with it for buying something so useless.

RE: for iPad as well?
By kmmatney on 3/11/2010 10:11:27 PM , Rating: 2
Its the same old tired argument. Sure, a netbook can do anything the iPad can do, and more, but it won't be the same experience. The iPad is meant for sitting on your couch, and browsing the web, watching videos, reading books, playing games, etc... Sure you can do that on a netbook, but I wouldn't want to. Heck, I would rather browse the web with my iphone while sitting on my couch, rather than a netbook. While I can't picture myself using a netbook very much, I can see using a device like the iPad all the time. The LED backlit IPS display on the iPad will blow away any netbook screen - that enough to already make it a better web browser than a netbook, in my book.

RE: for iPad as well?
By CZroe on 3/12/2010 2:07:39 AM , Rating: 2
Orwell's 1984 being similarly deleted from Amazon Kindles was similarly ironic, though it had a lot to do with the people offering it not having the rights to do so.

Yes, Kindle has a killbit just like Apple, but at least Kindle never made an iconic superbowl commercial out of it!

RE: for iPad as well?
By MrPoletski on 3/17/2010 5:21:07 AM , Rating: 2
Ah but the iPad has the advantage that soon the only competing netbook you buy will have to be steam powered because Jobs is fighting a patent suit over the 'general usage of electrons in a handheld device'

RE: for iPad as well?
By mfed3 on 3/11/2010 5:11:37 PM , Rating: 2
Bull crap. Jason Mick writes this same article every 3 months and look how that turned out. Why is he still working at DailyTech again?

By Inkjammer on 3/11/2010 12:02:20 PM , Rating: 3
Hasn't Apple been saying from the start they can't/didn't do multitasking on the iPhone because of battery life, and battery life alone?

My 3GS' battery barely lasts a day as it is. I can't imagine how much worse this would make it.

RE: Uhm
By FlyBri on 3/11/2010 12:24:24 PM , Rating: 5
You know what, here's a solution -- just have another charged battery ready to...oh wait, that's right, you can't remove the battery in an iPhone. I respect Apple's software development, ease of use, and design cues, but most of their products really are form over function.

RE: Uhm
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: Uhm
By axias41 on 3/11/2010 3:06:37 PM , Rating: 2
It's incredible that such a stupid thing like a battery extender became a better feature that the possibility of change battery.

RE: Uhm
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: Uhm
By Keeir on 3/11/2010 8:19:23 PM , Rating: 2

How are they significant different?

Extra Battery - Remember to Carry. Remember to Charge. Works with only one Device

Battery Extender - Remember to Carry. Remember to Charge. Might (but not likely) work with multiple devices.

That whole issue is overblown

Apple charges around ~80 for a Battery Change... which would be required less than once every 2 years (typical product cycle). Last I checked, if your battery died (less than 50% left) in under one year, they replaced the battery for free.

If your really concerned, you can extend the coverage upto 2 years, for ~70 dollars at time of purchase... and of course get extra coverage not just battery.

I don't like the Apple Battery being non-user replacable in the Iphone either, but I think Apple's Battery policy is industry leading in cell phones. Sony Ericsson and Nokia both will not replace your battery regardless of condition in my experience....

RE: Uhm
By axias41 on 3/12/2010 4:08:52 AM , Rating: 2
My backup battery is much smaller than a battery extender. And I have a phone recharger that can recharge my phone and backup battery at the same time.

RE: Uhm
By Pirks on 3/12/10, Rating: 0
RE: Uhm
By xti on 3/15/2010 10:04:30 AM , Rating: 2
and im sorry, but phones that arent iPhones just look so out of place now-a-days in US culture. maybe you dont care about the "IT" factor, but in the mainstreat its a big deal, like it or hate it, that's just the way it is nowadays.

Style/status is a feature, just like email. Die hard internet people will refuse to ever admit it.

RE: Uhm
By PrinceGaz on 3/11/2010 12:27:49 PM , Rating: 3
Multitasking shouldn't affect battery life much provided those apps you run in the background use minimal CPU power.

Hopefully with OS 4.0 you'll be able to choose which apps close completely when exited, and which continue to run in the background. Personallyme I would be happy to have things like Music, Videos, and Safari close when exited, whilst having some others like Skype remain in the background.

RE: Uhm
By Inkjammer on 3/11/2010 12:31:15 PM , Rating: 4
It shouldn't, but background tasks like IM notifications have a significant impact on the iPhone as it is right now.

Uh Oh
By pequin06 on 3/11/2010 11:00:41 AM , Rating: 5
Multi-tasking OS?
Looks like Apple will be violating patents, unless they claim they invented multi-tasking as well.

RE: Uh Oh
By Abrahmm on 3/11/2010 11:12:03 AM , Rating: 4
They probably already filed a patent claim for "Multi-tasking OS ON A MOBILE DEVICE " betting the last part will make their claim legit, much like a bunch of their other patents.

RE: Uh Oh
By MrDiSante on 3/11/2010 12:06:28 PM , Rating: 2
I know it's a joke, but just off the top of my head prior art: Pocket PC 2000. Released in 2000.

RE: Uh Oh
By Drag0nFire on 3/11/2010 11:40:44 AM , Rating: 4
I'm not sure Apple is ready for a multi-tasking OS. Apple wants to capitalize on its patents for under-tasking on a mobile device for as long as possible.

I believe the patent is titled "Conserving Power By Reducing User Experience."

RE: Uh Oh
By Sazar on 3/11/2010 12:55:55 PM , Rating: 2
I believe they own a patent for "doing lots of stuff". I think it is appropriately vague enough to sue everyone and their grand-mothers cat out of existence.

RE: Uh Oh
By crystal clear on 3/11/2010 1:05:13 PM , Rating: 2
Note Jason called it "TRUE multi-tasking"......they are full on patenting the user experience called iTMT !

By themaster08 on 3/11/2010 11:43:03 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder what Reader1's take on this is, since he's made it quite clear that Apple were wise to disable multitasking.

I have a feeling he might remain quiet on this one.

RE: Hmmmm.
By Pirks on 3/11/2010 11:53:44 AM , Rating: 4
It's easy to predict what reader1 will say, something like "it was wise to disable multitasking and measure market reaction, gather feedback and then carefully design super duper multitasking system that beats anything else out there", there ya go enjoy and doubledownrate me if reader1 says something else okay? ;)

RE: Hmmmm.
By themaster08 on 3/11/2010 11:58:56 AM , Rating: 1
there ya go enjoy and doubledownrate me if reader1 says something else okay? ;)

I have no issue with what you said, and neither should anyone else. In fact I agree entirely.

RE: Hmmmm.
By EasyC on 3/11/2010 12:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
That was the first time I ever uprated Pirks. Kudos.

RE: Hmmmm.
By cochy on 3/11/2010 12:40:03 PM , Rating: 3
Too bad your uprate was canceled out by the fact that you posted. Poor pirks would have preferred you uprated in silence :)

RE: Hmmmm.
By EasyC on 3/11/2010 1:17:50 PM , Rating: 2
I never knew it worked like that lol.

RE: Hmmmm.
By djc208 on 3/11/2010 3:39:40 PM , Rating: 2
A perfectly reasonable and prudent response, and not a bad strategy. Though I'd argue it further proves the issue that Apple doesn't innovate as much as they just manage to do someone elses ideas better and make everyone think it's theirs.

However I'm sure Apple will screw it up somehow. Like all apps that want to multi-task will have to get some new, different app store approval to be multi-tasking capable which will create a whole other level of arbatrary Apple sensorship/control that no one will be able to understand.

RE: Hmmmm.
By Marlonsm on 3/11/2010 5:57:56 PM , Rating: 1
You forgot the part that Apple invented multitasking and had a secret patent on it. And will sue everybody who dared to use it before the time.

RE: Hmmmm.
By alanore on 3/11/2010 2:37:10 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah Apple fanboyz must be really angry with getting multitasking. Especially because a lack of multitasking was one of the reasons the iphone is soo good.

On a serious note, Apple really had to do this for the ipad if they ever wanted it to compete with netbooks.

Oh my...
By Abrahmm on 3/11/2010 11:10:04 AM , Rating: 1
A multi-tasking OS? Welcome to the 21st century Apple! You are only a few decades late!

This is only one tiny step towards making the iPhone even remotely close to the functionality Android offers. Still have to tackle that pesky dictator Steve Jobs and that whole flash issue.

RE: Oh my...
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oh my...
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oh my...
By The0ne on 3/11/2010 11:39:07 AM , Rating: 2
I be careful about using the term "true multitasking" as there aren't many OS and devices that implements it properly. I personally think Palm Pre did a good job on their multi-tasking and it'll be interesting to see how Appple implements it.

RE: Oh my...
By Inkjammer on 3/11/2010 12:05:32 PM , Rating: 1
It only took about two and half years or so for them to roll out Copy and Paste. Apple has always been a company that introduces standard features others have, and have always had, and introduced them giant press releases.

RE: Oh my...
By HaB1971 on 3/11/2010 1:31:07 PM , Rating: 5
It only took about two and half years or so for them to roll out Copy and Paste

You are forgetting that they had to invent it first. Something like that doesn't happen overnight you know ;-)

My idea for multi-tasking on iPhone
By ksherman on 3/11/2010 11:51:44 AM , Rating: 2
What about using the bar at the bottom as a dock more like the one in OS X? with a higher resolution display, which HAS to be coming to the iPhone, you could easily fit 5-6 applications down there.

Instead of it being only for your most-used applications, it could be for running apps.

Make the first home page for those most-used apps (especially with that first page being quickly accessed by tapping the home button already).

Close an app? Hold it down, the apps wiggle and you hit the x to close it (open applications have a red 'x' instead of a black one, so you don't think you're deleting the app).

BAM. Multitasking. I should be an 'analyst'

RE: My idea for multi-tasking on iPhone
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: -1
By ksherman on 3/11/2010 12:03:25 PM , Rating: 2
Use that to assign a program to run in the background. Say you open Pandora, choose a station, three-finger-swipe to return to the home screen while it runs in the background.

Alternatively, since many people that have been using an iPhone going on two-three years, three-finger-swipe is what actually closes the app if you have it open. Just hitting the home button leaves the app running... Either one could work.

There should also likely be a cap at 5-6 running applications, though I could see it really being limited to 3 (who needs THAT many apps running all the time anyway?!)

RE: My idea for multi-tasking on iPhone
By PrinceGaz on 3/11/2010 12:19:32 PM , Rating: 2
Why not make apps running in the background switchable to with a swipe along the bottom of the screen instead, leaving the current layout unchanged but allowing a quick switch to another running app.

By a swipe along the bottom, I mean in the same way a swipe along the top already opens SBSettings in a drop-down window (presumably they would use a rise-up window showing running apps).

btw I know SBSettings is not official, but it is a good example of an interface Apple should adopt for its official Settings app.

By ksherman on 3/11/2010 12:28:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'd never heard of SBSettings... If you start having to swipe in particular regions for things, it makes the device more complicated to use for the average bloke.

However, maybe this is Apple's way of using the bezel area for some touch-based features. Might mean that the current iPhone models would not support multi-tasking, which makes sense to me. My iPhone 3G is already soooo slow I could imagine running Pandora in the background while trying to send a text message or sending an email... Ugh.

By psenechal on 3/11/2010 12:38:01 PM , Rating: 1
Make sure you patent that and then sue Apple when they implement it ;)

Negative spin on Apple again?
By dcarlton1 on 3/11/2010 11:27:35 AM , Rating: 2
Not hard to see the negative spin placed on every article by the author.
Surely Dailytech can do better than this.

By crystal clear on 3/11/2010 12:28:07 PM , Rating: 2
Yes the negative iSpin serves as a motivator to get drones like Pirks,Reader1 into action & to get the Apple bashers blasting away their anti aircraft guns desperately trying to shoot down the drones .

At the same time rating go up & down like shares on the stock exchange,plenty of reds to highlight the page.

In the end everybody is happy & feel good about themselves after a bloody battle awaiting the next encounter (another Apple article).

The love hate relationship that apple bashers have for Pirks is a unique experience similar to the iphone & the mighty iPad.

A day without Pirks is boredoom...they miss him very much.

So there is plenty of positive in the negative for DT & for the commentators....its fun & its really works !

An apple a day keeps the boredoom away !

RE: Negative spin on Apple again?
By xpax on 3/11/2010 4:06:37 PM , Rating: 1
Currently the iPhone rivals the PSP Go and Nintendo DSi as a mobile gaming platform.

The Onion is such a great site.. hey.. this isn't The Onion!?!

The iPhone is a laughable piece of crap when it comes to gaming. Yeah, it's great for driving games, or bowling, or fishing or anything where you just pointlessly wave your phone around like you're having a Wii flashback on the subway. Yeah, it's wonderful.

i know many people are dumb, but come on.
By invidious on 3/11/2010 11:00:52 AM , Rating: 2
One of the big problems is that multi-tasking could hurt gaming on the iPhone if resource management isn't implemented perfectly.

If only there were a way to close applications when you want to free up reasources. Oh wait there is a way. What I just said.

By vapore0n on 3/11/2010 11:12:12 AM , Rating: 2
I think the hole point of multitasking is to not close those apps.

Memory management is quite important. A change to their sdk so as to avoid bad programing practices could help their cause.

I don't see the reason...
By Fanon on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: I don't see the reason...
By ksherman on 3/11/2010 11:40:22 AM , Rating: 2
I only want audio applications to be able to run in the background. ie Public Radio or Pandora. Otherwise, I can give a hoot.

RE: I don't see the reason...
By HotFoot on 3/11/2010 3:40:26 PM , Rating: 2
Unless you have Skype (or the like) integrated into the phone, then the app to run it needs to be on in the background if you'd like to receive calls on Skype. For myself, being able to make or receive Skype calls whether I'm on wi-fi or 3g is the #1 reason I got my phone.

By damianrobertjones on 3/11/2010 3:40:31 PM , Rating: 2
Has multi-tasking been available on other phones for years or is this an EXCLUSIVE apple thing? /Sarcasm.


Could DailyTech 'PLEASE' resolve their add virus problem as mentioned by more than a few people the other day as the re-direction has happened again and BEFORE people jump on me saying 'Dude, it's your pc'... no, it's not.

Tested using a clean vm, tested in work, tested by friends.

Stop the re-direction before someone gets infected. You confirmed that your add company removed various adds the other week and I'd suggest getting them to check as it's happening AGAIN

RE: No
By kmmatney on 3/11/2010 10:02:54 PM , Rating: 2
Yep - I had the stupid fake virus thing just a few seconds ago. I only had one web page open - this site.

Pirks.... why so quiet.
By petrosy on 3/11/2010 5:05:22 PM , Rating: 2
I remember the good old days... when Pirks aka "The Troll", would bang on how useless multi-tasking is and that it would suck battery life etc etc... the list goes on.

How foolish for Symbian,Palm, Android and Windows to do it. Personally I think a multitasking iPhone is a waste of time, as the assumption is that an Apples fanboi can string 2 simultaneous thoughts together at one time...doubt it!

What now? I guess Apple invented multi-tasking as well. Maybe they should patent it.

RE: Pirks.... why so quiet.
By Pirks on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: Pirks.... why so quiet.
By Fritzr on 3/12/2010 12:02:00 AM , Rating: 2
I remember the good old days when the mainstream press maintained that MS-DOS was the greatest thing since sliced bread and multi-tasking GUIs on Amiga, Mac & ST were useless for business users. Then came MS Windows...

MS Windows is still missing features those '80s OSes had :P

Ah well it is still the most supported and we did get a multi-tasking GUI once MS finally added most of those useless features :D

Multitasking on a standard iPhone 3G?
By probedb on 3/12/2010 4:44:47 AM , Rating: 2
I think not. It's a slow phone as it stands, if there's proper multitasking it'll grind to a halt.

By Pirks on 3/12/2010 1:22:33 PM , Rating: 2
Apple will introduce new gen hardware with iPhone OS 4.0, so there's no problem.

By Smilin on 3/11/2010 11:17:45 AM , Rating: 2
Oh great jobs I fall to my knees with my arms upstreached to your heavenly palace and ask that you bring us more of that which is insanely great!

Here, I'll let you have copy paste and multitasking.

OOOhh ooOooooOOOooohhaaaa! <jizz flies everywhere> Bless you jobs! Blesss <jizzz> youuuu!!!


By Smilin on 3/11/10, Rating: 0
Am I the only one?
By n0ebert on 3/12/2010 9:56:02 AM , Rating: 2
Am I the only one that had the thought that once Apple releases this latest version of their OS they'll start suing everyone else who has multi-tasking on their phones? It seems to be their trend lately.

Isn't there a patent for that?
By cheetah2k on 3/16/2010 1:17:10 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder who owns the "multi-tasking" patent?

By textkills on 3/24/2010 3:42:14 AM , Rating: 2
Texting while driving: Why do we do it?
By Dan Blacharski, contributor

[TEXTKILLS.COM - March 23,2010] Everybody knows it’s a bonehead move, but people still do it. Texting while driving is still regrettably common on US streets and highways, and it has been the cause of innumerable near-misses and more than a few accidents, including a deadly train crash in California that killed 25 people. We tend to take driving a car for granted, and think nothing of taking our eyes off the road to do any number of activities that could wait for later.

What’s even more disturbing is that public employees whose office is behind the wheel text while driving. The train engineer, who was distracted by text messages at the time of the tragic Chatsworth, California accident, was not the only public employee to ever put the public at risk due to this reckless practice. Only recently, a Washington, DC bus driver was caught texting while driving by a passenger armed with a cell phone camera. Although the driver was fired, he does have the right under union contract to file a grievance. We can only hope that the driver has enough common sense to look for another line of work. A bus driver in San Antonio, Texas was also caught on camera texting, and subsequently ramming his bus into an SUV. The Department of Transportation has recently announced guidance to prohibit commercial drivers from texting while driving, subjecting them to civil or criminal penalties.

Prominent celebrities and lawmakers have stepped up to raise public awareness and call for legislation to deal with the situation. Oprah Winfrey, on her popular television show, aired an episode featuring people who have lost loved ones to cell phone-driving related crashes, and she has set up a section of her web site to encourage people to take a pledge to make their cars a “no phone zone”. Several states have enacted legislation to forbid talking on a cell phone or sending text messages while driving, and Federal safety regulators have also created a set of guidelines to encourage more states to pass similar laws.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, about 6,000 people died in 2008 because of a crash that occurred when the driver was distracted, and more than 500,000 suffered injuries. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia have passed laws banning texting while driving, and seven states have passed laws banning use of any handheld device while driving. There is currently legislation in the Senate that would bar all texting while driving across the board.

Just how dangerous is it? First and foremost, texting while driving just doesn’t pass the “common sense” test, but Car and Driver decided to demonstrate that it’s a bad idea once and for all, and compare driver’s reactions while they are texting against while they have been drinking. Academic studies conducted by simulators have already shown that texting while driving is a bad idea, but Car and Driver conducted the only live test, renting an open taxiway at an airport and equipping drivers with smart phones with full keypads. The results were astounding, showing that drivers that were texting were even more impaired than drivers who had been drinking.

Talking on a cell phone or sending a text seems like a simple enough task, and it is. But the fact is, doing so distracts us while we are driving, and in the case of texting, requires us to take our eyes off the road while we send and receive those friendly little messages. It may seem harmless at first to send a cute message to your friend about last night’s “Simpson’s” episode, but remember, the results could be devastating.

What do you think? Care to Comment?

By textkills on 3/24/2010 3:44:41 AM , Rating: 2
I switched from I-Phone to Droid for this exact reason. I recently spent a week in Las Vegas and spent less than an hour on my laptop. I did everything from my Droid.

Umm, so....
By The0ne on 3/11/2010 11:42:15 AM , Rating: 1
Its smartphone rivals though have been unable to must much gaming success --

I too have been unable to MUST any gaming success ;_; Poor me.

Right back at you JM, karma sucks hard O.o

By phenimation on 3/18/2010 1:57:56 AM , Rating: 1
I would like flash very much on my ipod touch. Sure there are heaps of junky ads that i could do without, but what about videos? Sure, youtube has a mobile version which can work on the ipod touch, but what about small sites? What i would really like is an option for turning flash on and off in the menu so that when i wish to watch a flash video i turn it on and when i am done i turn it off.

"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki