4 ms·

I asked "How could a lack of multitasking be made up for by rapid switching between tasks?" Single-task at the speed of light for all it matters, you still nev

I asked "How could a lack of multitasking be made up for by rapid switching between tasks?" Single-task at the speed of light for all it matters, you still never get the benefit of not closing everything you're doing just to open up the iPad's text editor.

ugh 17y ago
Easy. Apps which save their state when you close them. Not a solution to all problems (i.e. playing music in the background) but to the user it doesn't make any difference whether that Spreadsheet app she just left to take a note keeps on running in the background or quits if she finds it exactly the way she left it when coming back. (As long as it's speedy enough.) Users don't want multitasking. They may say so - don't listen to them. They want to be able to do stuff. One traditional way to let them do stuff is multitaksing. That's why they are screaming for it now. But there is no reason why the solution that let's them do stuff actually has to be multitasking. It could be something else entirely.
- mbrubeck 17y ago
  It matters if the "stuff" they want to do is listen to their favorite music app (e.g. Pandora) while playing their favorite game. Or let a passenger in the car look up travel info on the web while the GPS navigation app continues to give directions.
  - ugh 17y ago
    Um, yes, sure. I even mentioned that (you might have missed it). Those are problems, but you don’t necessarily have to solve them with multitasking. Or better: the kind of multitasking you know. Most apps can just save their state and quit. Some apps in some specific circumstances should keep running. The iPhone already supports that kind of multitasking (Phone app, iPod app, Voice Memo app) but only Apple can use it. I see no reason why they wouldn’t extend that to all developers sooner or later. The iPhone and the iPad suck if you want to do what you just said regularly. That’s certainly true. But many other traditional tasks of multitasking are handled quite gracefully right now without any multitasking.
    - whopa 17y ago
      > The iPhone already supports that kind of multitasking (Phone app, iPod app, Voice Memo app) but only Apple can use it. I see no reason why they wouldn’t extend that to all developers sooner or later. I see a reason. Apple may want to give iTunes a competitive edge over other music apps by keeping it the only music app that can work in the background. This doesn't seem out of line of Apple's character as of late.
      - ugh 17y ago
        No way to resolve this other than to wait. I don't know. Apple sometimes does strange stuff that seems otherwise out of character.

ugh 17y ago

Easy. Apps which save their state when you close them. Not a solution to all problems (i.e. playing music in the background) but to the user it doesn't make any difference whether that Spreadsheet app she just left to take a note keeps on running in the background or quits if she finds it exactly the way she left it when coming back. (As long as it's speedy enough.) Users don't want multitasking. They may say so - don't listen to them. They want to be able to do stuff. One traditional way to let them do stuff is multitaksing. That's why they are screaming for it now. But there is no reason why the solution that let's them do stuff actually has to be multitasking. It could be something else entirely.

mbrubeck 17y ago
It matters if the "stuff" they want to do is listen to their favorite music app (e.g. Pandora) while playing their favorite game. Or let a passenger in the car look up travel info on the web while the GPS navigation app continues to give directions.
- ugh 17y ago
  Um, yes, sure. I even mentioned that (you might have missed it). Those are problems, but you don’t necessarily have to solve them with multitasking. Or better: the kind of multitasking you know. Most apps can just save their state and quit. Some apps in some specific circumstances should keep running. The iPhone already supports that kind of multitasking (Phone app, iPod app, Voice Memo app) but only Apple can use it. I see no reason why they wouldn’t extend that to all developers sooner or later. The iPhone and the iPad suck if you want to do what you just said regularly. That’s certainly true. But many other traditional tasks of multitasking are handled quite gracefully right now without any multitasking.
  - whopa 17y ago
    > The iPhone already supports that kind of multitasking (Phone app, iPod app, Voice Memo app) but only Apple can use it. I see no reason why they wouldn’t extend that to all developers sooner or later. I see a reason. Apple may want to give iTunes a competitive edge over other music apps by keeping it the only music app that can work in the background. This doesn't seem out of line of Apple's character as of late.
    - ugh 17y ago
      No way to resolve this other than to wait. I don't know. Apple sometimes does strange stuff that seems otherwise out of character.