Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'iPad OS' started by jskahan, Jan 29, 2010.
This is the latest word on multitasking.
Here's a workaround to play music outside of iTunes in the background and effectively Multitask an Internet streaming station while using other apps:
My iPad suddenly became much better!
This is why I say people don't understand mobile multitasking. That isn't desktop multitasking. That is task switching using saved states, which keeps battery life high and gives the illusion that multiple apps are running simultaneously. It is how Palm Pre stays so fast while "running" 25 apps at once.
Combined with background operations for audio playback people can finally quit complaining.
Multitasking leads to mediocrity
I think that multitasking will need to be handled very carefully and only extended to applications that absolutely need it (e.g. music, telephony, and mail). I worry that it will increase the 'crap factor' and make the iPad less elegant and reliable.
It's important to remember that the iPad's simplicity will be the cornerstone of its success. It's really more of a consumer electronics device than it is a computer, which is why it can remain relatively inexpensive and easy to use. It provides all the functionality of a computer without the previous limitations and costs, because it has compromised certain features to keep true to its design maxim. Each app is designed for a specific purpose; form follows function. This is a nice equilibrium.
Forcing developers to keep their apps completely self-contained, as well as saving state persistence between sessions (when the app is closed, then reopened) is really good design discipline. Offering multitasking would endanger this discipline by offering kludges. Developers will get lazy and try to find workarounds, resulting in buggy software. I think that the current situation is much better.
Besides, multitasking could be achieved in a round about fashion by offloading some of the functionality of the app to a server Cloud (as ScanR does) and having the interconnectivity between applications happen there, rather than on the device itself.
No, I'm really glad that the device doesn't support multitasking. It keeps the system simple, reliable, prolongs battery life and forces developers and users to take a new, different and exciting approach to computing.
States are fine and dandy for some Apps. Others, not so much. I do not want a "state" if I am using say "Pandora and Safari". A save state will be useless in that situation, as I want to listen to the music why I surf.
Edit: I read your last sentence, but it makes me wonder how it will work with others that require more then a save state, but do not revolve around audio. Say maybe, I need live notifications from a App, that does not support PUSH maybe? Would I get those Live notifications if the App is simply in save state? I hope that does not sound confusing.
I think multi-tasking will be available when mac osx port to iPad.
Will the new OS have unrestricted multi-tasking?
The basic question is, will the processor handle the added demands without bogging down often enough to be annoying. I suspect not. Even the existing system will bog down occasionally, but not enough to annoy.
Sometimes more is not better. But you said it better.
Ok, even if it isn't the "point", shouldn't *every* device be able to multi-task? I mean, why not??
jailbroken ipad use backgrounder to multitask if you need it...