3 ms·

I agree 100%. We've even been having this exact discussion here on HN in the last 5 days! It's basically been the instant litmus test to identify a rabid fanboy

I agree 100%. We've even been having this exact discussion here on HN in the last 5 days! It's basically been the instant litmus test to identify a rabid fanboy from the rest of the population. The "discussions", if I can be generous and call them that, have been ridiculous and transparent and usually runs like this: Normal Person: The i<product> has no multitasking, this is a sorely missing feature Rabid Fanboy: This omission is actually a "feature". Since Apple never does anything wrong, it's clear that this is actually just better for us. Besides nobody uses multitasking anyways, what could you possibly want to use it for?! Only crazy people want a computing platform that can run more than one thing. Besides Apple needs to keep the user experience perfect like it is (oh it's so orgasmic). And double besides, it already does do multitasking, Apple just uses it for their own things and keeps outside developers (who don't know what they are doing anyways, those idiots) from mucking up the precious user experience and draining the whole battery down in 5 minutes. Normal Person: That actually doesn't even make any sense. There are plenty of examples of mobile platforms with multitasking that don't have any of the feared problems you are talking about, Palm, Android,... Rabid Fanboy: THOSE SUCK! SUCK! <hits own head with closed fist over and over> <pause and takes a deep breath as if trying to explain some critical thing to a 5 year old> None of those platforms are the iPhone. NONE OF THEM. Normal Person: Again, that makes no sense. By all appearances, the fact that this feature is supported just fine elsewhere, and not on the iPhone actually makes Apple look a little inept. Rabid Fanoy: <head explodes>

wtallis 17y ago
Those characters would be more accurately called "Strawman 1" and "Strawman 2", or perhaps just "Strawman" and "elblanco". None of the "rabid fanboys" have been claiming that multitasking will reduce battery life down to 5 minutes. Most haven't claimed that nobody uses multitasking; they just say that most normal people can get along without it. The "normal people"/people who love to troll Apple users/you like to claim that Palm, Android, etc. have great multitasking systems, while ignoring the fact that those platforms do have noticeable UI lag, and generally worse battery life or performance. If you're trying to make a sound argument against Apple's stance of offering limited or no multitasking, you need to acknowledge the tradeoffs and then show that the stuttering, longer page loading times, or lower battery life are worth the overall productivity increase of multitasking. You can't just claim the downsides don't exist.
- elblanco 17y ago
  > None of the "rabid fanboys" have been claiming that multitasking will reduce battery life down to 5 minutes. Most haven't claimed that nobody uses multitasking; they just say that most normal people can get along without it. Do you even read this site? Go look back at the last 6 months of posts on the iPhone and iPad. Nearly every single thread brings up this issue, and the fanboys come out in droves to try and explain away this lack of functionality -- most typically with nonsense arguments like I posted above: - GUIs for multitasking are too hard! - The battery will drain! - The GPS will be pinging all the time! - Nobody uses multitasking! - I don't want a phone that needs a task manager to kill background apps! (I bet a whole Nigerian Dollar that we'll see task manager apps within 6 months in the app store) - etc. see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1240366 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1240366 Now Apple comes out with multitasking (limited or not, it doesn't matter, just because Pandora can now play music in the background doesn't mean that Apple pumped their API full of magic pixi dusts where suddenly that won't eat away at the battery.) So now what do we see fanboys carrying on about? <Backtrack backtrack backtrack, revision, revision, revision> Fanboys: We never said that multitasking wasn't important! We just said that mumble mumble. Besides it's not lack these are just background apps, there's a special magic API that developers can use that's so carefully designed and built by dwarves in their mountain code smithery out of mithril and fairy dust that it doesn't fall afoul of any of the problems we see everywhere else, like UI LAG! > The "normal people"/people who love to troll Apple users/you like to claim that Palm, Android, etc. have great multitasking systems, while ignoring the fact that those platforms do have noticeable UI lag, and generally worse battery life or performance. If you're trying to make a sound argument against Apple's stance of offering limited or no multitasking, you need to acknowledge the tradeoffs and then show that the stuttering, longer page loading times, or lower battery life are worth the overall productivity increase of multitasking. You can't just claim the downsides don't exist. My point is now proven. See your own comment. The OS upgrade and the availability of an API for background services doesn't suddenly free Apple from these constraints either. I think somebody here even made some claim about how other phone makers had a problem with location based apps draining battery by constantly pinging the GPS. Apparently he didn't read the press announcement where Apple allows for just exactly that function in background services. Either fanboys said multitasking was a bad idea on a phone or they didn't. And if they did they listed a bunch of reasons why. None of those reasons are eliminated with this variant of multi-tasking. sigh It's like fighting with people who suffer from continuous short-term memory loss regarding things they just said.

wtallis 17y ago

Those characters would be more accurately called "Strawman 1" and "Strawman 2", or perhaps just "Strawman" and "elblanco". None of the "rabid fanboys" have been claiming that multitasking will reduce battery life down to 5 minutes. Most haven't claimed that nobody uses multitasking; they just say that most normal people can get along without it. The "normal people"/people who love to troll Apple users/you like to claim that Palm, Android, etc. have great multitasking systems, while ignoring the fact that those platforms do have noticeable UI lag, and generally worse battery life or performance. If you're trying to make a sound argument against Apple's stance of offering limited or no multitasking, you need to acknowledge the tradeoffs and then show that the stuttering, longer page loading times, or lower battery life are worth the overall productivity increase of multitasking. You can't just claim the downsides don't exist.

elblanco 17y ago
> None of the "rabid fanboys" have been claiming that multitasking will reduce battery life down to 5 minutes. Most haven't claimed that nobody uses multitasking; they just say that most normal people can get along without it. Do you even read this site? Go look back at the last 6 months of posts on the iPhone and iPad. Nearly every single thread brings up this issue, and the fanboys come out in droves to try and explain away this lack of functionality -- most typically with nonsense arguments like I posted above: - GUIs for multitasking are too hard! - The battery will drain! - The GPS will be pinging all the time! - Nobody uses multitasking! - I don't want a phone that needs a task manager to kill background apps! (I bet a whole Nigerian Dollar that we'll see task manager apps within 6 months in the app store) - etc. see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1240366 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1240366 Now Apple comes out with multitasking (limited or not, it doesn't matter, just because Pandora can now play music in the background doesn't mean that Apple pumped their API full of magic pixi dusts where suddenly that won't eat away at the battery.) So now what do we see fanboys carrying on about? <Backtrack backtrack backtrack, revision, revision, revision> Fanboys: We never said that multitasking wasn't important! We just said that mumble mumble. Besides it's not lack these are just background apps, there's a special magic API that developers can use that's so carefully designed and built by dwarves in their mountain code smithery out of mithril and fairy dust that it doesn't fall afoul of any of the problems we see everywhere else, like UI LAG! > The "normal people"/people who love to troll Apple users/you like to claim that Palm, Android, etc. have great multitasking systems, while ignoring the fact that those platforms do have noticeable UI lag, and generally worse battery life or performance. If you're trying to make a sound argument against Apple's stance of offering limited or no multitasking, you need to acknowledge the tradeoffs and then show that the stuttering, longer page loading times, or lower battery life are worth the overall productivity increase of multitasking. You can't just claim the downsides don't exist. My point is now proven. See your own comment. The OS upgrade and the availability of an API for background services doesn't suddenly free Apple from these constraints either. I think somebody here even made some claim about how other phone makers had a problem with location based apps draining battery by constantly pinging the GPS. Apparently he didn't read the press announcement where Apple allows for just exactly that function in background services. Either fanboys said multitasking was a bad idea on a phone or they didn't. And if they did they listed a bunch of reasons why. None of those reasons are eliminated with this variant of multi-tasking. sigh It's like fighting with people who suffer from continuous short-term memory loss regarding things they just said.