4 ms·

Make no mistake about it--they could run Mac OS X on the iPad a year ago, if they wanted to. The iPhone OS (3.2) that supports the iPad is a full-fledged Mach/

• wallflower 17y ago
  As I sit here on my Windows machine, looking at Process Lasso Pro - I'm fascinated by the background processes eating up my performance. Virus scanner to Outlook to winlogon.exe. Even if Mac OS X could run on the new A4 chip, I think Apple is concerned about 3rd party apps that are multi-tasking degrading the performance/overall experience.
  • stcredzero 17y ago
    I predict that Apple will come out with a background-task API that puts hard realtime constraints on the work a background thread does. Basically, you register a block of code as a background task, and select an Apple defined "level of service." If your code block doesn't complete during the time interval allotted to it, then the dev is SOL. If they did this, they could have background tasks that would satisfy 80 to 90% of what devs want to do, but preserve battery life.
    • glhaynes 17y ago
      I think this is exactly right. I also think there'll be some persistent indicator (I'm thinking a little icon in the bar at the top that contains the clock) for each ongoing background task. So people won't have background tasks eating up their battery/RAM without knowing they're still running.
      • stcredzero 17y ago
        I also think there'll be some persistent indicator...So people won't have background tasks eating up their battery/RAM without knowing they're still running. They can do this in such a way that it's useful if the user's running a 3-4 apps, but it's downright ugly if they're running an excessive amount.
      • stcredzero 17y ago
        I also think there'll be some persistent indicator...So people won't have background tasks eating up their battery/RAM without knowing they're still running. They can do this in such a way that it's useful if the user's running a 3-4 apps, but it's downright ugly if they're running an excessive amount.
        • glhaynes 17y ago
          It's difficult for me to imagine why I'd have more than a couple of apps running in the background on iPad. But, then, I'm a very happy iPhone user who feels like Push Notifications are a great 80% solution to multitasking and who only very rarely feels the need for that other 20% to be taken care of. I'd like to have an app running in the background (other than the "iPod" app) playing music. But clearly I don't need more than one of those. Maybe true multitasking would allow better IM clients. I could see running one or two of those in the background. What else? I'm not going to be downloading torrents on my iPad.
          • metachor 17y ago
            I can think of only one multi-tasking use case that I would like to see, which is this: While commenting on some web forum (HN, Reddit, etc) or chatting on AIM/IRC, I often find while in the middle of typing a comment that I want to look something up on the web, e.g. a fact or spelling, and then come back to finish my comment armed with whatever knowledge I just looked up. The best interim solution is to copy the text of my partially-finished comment, quit the current app, open a notes app and paste the comment, quit the notes app and open web browser, look up whatever I'm looking for, quit web browser and go back to the notes app, copy the comment again, quit notes app and open up the original app and find whatever I was replying to again, paste in my comment, and finally finish typing. I don't really need multi-tasking to get around this, but it might be helpful if there was a way to "freeze" the current state of an app so I could use another app for 5 minutes without the first one having to quit and lose all of my context.
            • glhaynes 17y ago
              Safari on iPhone remembers text that you've input into a form when you make a new page (roughly the equivalent of a "tab" in a desktop browser), switch away, then come back.* It behaves similarly when you switch to a different app (through going back to the Home screen) and then come back to Safari. [Though I will note that it doesn't "remember" such things as a partially-entered URL in the location bar. It should.] In general, the trend in "nice" apps seems to be very much toward them remembering exactly where you had been when you switch back to them rather than starting back at "the top". This seemed revelatory when the first apps started doing it; now it seems obvious. Doing that requires a fair bit of work, though, by the app developer... so perhaps Apple could do something with the system frameworks to make that functionality be more "for free" to the developer. When iPhone first came out, developers found out that their apps were completely shut down by the OS when they switched away, so they imagined their apps working the same way as they would on a desktop OS when they get closed and reopened: back to the "main menu". There's no reason that has to be the case, though, if developers just persist the relevant bits of the user's state when they switch away then restore it gracefully. * in general; if memory is running low, Safari will "forget" everything about other pages, so if you were writing something substantial, it'd be best to remember to Select All + Copy before switching away. This is unfortunate.
      • DougBTX 17y ago
        They could follow the pattern used for the iPhone, where background tasks which the user should car to know about (Voice Recorder, Phone.app) takes up a double height status bar at the top.
        • glhaynes 17y ago
          Good point. I could maybe see room for both models -- something that's going on RIGHT NOW and you need to continue to be aware of gets the big status bar while just little ongoing "wake up every 20 seconds and check for new messages" tasks wouldn't necessarily need that.