iPhone OS 4

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by photon

But that's stretching the definition of multitasking a bit far I guess.

In my opinion people over-value the word multitasking anyways. 90% of your apps desktop apps, when not the foreground application, are completely idle anyways. Fire up calculator and notepad, and minimize them away, and with no work to do, they aren’t scheduled to run in the background anyways.

Even a big app like Excel or whatever is doing nothing when in the background, unless you are running some big, long-running solution - and if Excel existed on the iPhone, and needed to do a big task like that while a user switched away from it, Apple has an API to handle that now.

[kermitology]

I think it's a little bit of a different method for doing multitasking. This is what apple has describing things:

iPhone OS 4 delivers seven new multitasking services that allow your apps to perform tasks in the background while preserving battery life and performance. These multitasking services include:

Background audio - Allows your app to play audio continuously. So customers can listen to your app while they surf the web, play games, and more.
Voice over IP - Your VoIP apps can now be even better. Users can now receive VoIP calls and have conversations while using another app. Your users can even receive calls when their phones are locked in their pocket.
Background location - Navigation apps can now continue to guide users who are listening to their iPods, or using other apps. iPhone OS 4 also provides a new and battery efficient way to monitor location when users move between cell towers. This is a great way for your social networking apps to keep track of users and their friends' locations.
Push notifications - Receive alerts from your remote servers even when your app isn't running.
Local notifications - Your app can now alert users of scheduled events and alarms in the background, no servers required.
Task finishing - If your app is in mid-task when your customer leaves it, the app can now keep running to finish the task.
Fast app switching - All developers should take advantage of this. This will allow users to leave your app and come right back to where they were when they left - no more having to reload the app.

Now.. read from this and take that there are certain actions that can operate in the background. It can only perform lightweight tasks as described above.

On a desktop computing platform each active application still maintains a memory footprint and still has process cycles that are performed, but the program state defines what's going on. Unless you're interacting with the application, most times it's not doing anything either (depending on the application) but logically the way for the iPhone to handle things is to only allow certain processes to run if registered correctly.

[photon]

http://gizmodo.com/5513441/iphone-os...ithin-24-hours

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by kermitology

I think it's a little bit of a different method for doing multitasking. This is what apple has describing things:



Now.. read from this and take that there are certain actions that can operate in the background. It can only perform lightweight tasks as described above.

On a desktop computing platform each active application still maintains a memory footprint and still has process cycles that are performed, but the program state defines what's going on. Unless you're interacting with the application, most times it's not doing anything either (depending on the application) but logically the way for the iPhone to handle things is to only allow certain processes to run if registered correctly.

Which makes me wonder what is the point of this new dock/task manager. The calculator is not running anything in the background so why does it show up there?

We already have a method of dealing with multitasking apps with the status bar like when you make a phone call and switch to Safari. So now we have 2 ways to switch applications and 2 ways to switch between apps with processes running, one of which may contain apps that do and don't have processes running.

[FanIn80]

I'm still looking at the task switcher as nothing more than a cmd-tab (or alt-tab) list of open apps. I know you can remove apps from the list, but I don't think you're actually doing anything to the task itself.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I'm still looking at the task switcher as nothing more than a cmd-tab (or alt-tab) list of open apps. I know you can remove apps from the list, but I don't think you're actually doing anything to the task itself.

Yeah maybe I need to start looking at it as that. With the addition of folders, I can't see my self using it all that much. It would be nice to treat apps with processes that are running in the background differently though like they do now.

[photon]

The one exception would be apps actually doing background stuff. I would expect for example that if you closed Pandora from the task switcher / manager / whatever that it would actually stop playing.

[photon]

http://theflashblog.com/?p=1888

Pretty strong words.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Which makes me wonder what is the point of this new dock/task manager. The calculator is not running anything in the background so why does it show up there?

Fast app switching. That's basically it.

[underGRADFlame]

Just loaded OS4 Beta on to my iPhone 3G (I have a friend that has the SDK) I absolutely love the folders I now have everything on one page with 6 folders. Looks like the first build has no home screen background support (the 3GS does as my friend has it). But to my worth it for the folders!

[FanIn80]

I know this is probably going to get ######edly ugly, because people are just dying to twist things into more than they really are... but...

But whether Apple's move is solely a shot directed at Adobe as Brimelow and others have contended appears to be up for debate, as AppleInsider notes that it may have more to do with the multitasking features being deployed in iPhone OS 4.

The primary reason for the change, say sources familiar with Apple's plans, is to support sophisticated new multitasking APIs in iPhone 4.0. The system will now be evaluating apps as they run in order to implement smart multitasking. It can't do this if apps are running within a runtime or are cross compiled with a foreign structure that doesn't behave identically to a native C/C++/Obj-C app.

"[The operating system] can't swap out resources, it can't pause some threads while allowing others to run, it can't selectively notify, etc. Apple needs full access to a properly-compiled app to do the pull off the tricks they are with this new OS," wrote one reader under the name Ktappe.

I tend to agree with this. There are also some other concerns like Apple doesn't want a scenario where new features in new versions of iPhone OS are stuck waiting for some 3rd-party IDE toolkit to get updated before people get to use them.

There's really not much difference between this and what Microsoft does with some of its hardware certification stuff, and also with their whole .Net thing.

One of these days, Adobe will figure out that if they want to capitalize on Apple's work, they're going to have to buy at least one Apple computer to develop their Mac apps on. Sorry Adobe. I know you think the world should just bend over and install your PDF viewer with 17 processes that run in the background, but if you don't evolve than you lose.

[Barnes]

When does the beta expire?

[FanIn80]

Launch day, I believe.

Actually... I don't think it ever "expires," per se... I think you just update to the final version when it launches.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Launch day, I believe.

Actually... I don't think it ever "expires," per se... I think you just update to the final version when it launches.

There are typically several beta's that will be released over the next while. Each one expires at a certain time after the next one is released until the GM seed.

In the 3.0 beta schedules I was super impressed with seed 2 and 3 then 4 came out and suddenly the performance went to poo and it never came back.

[Regorium]

I guess the question is why they couldn't release the new requirements, and then Adobe can just re-integrate it into their compiler to meet the new iPhone OS standards, rather than just saying no.

Unfortunately, in this battlefield (iPhones vs. Flash), Apple has the upper hand, and it's clear that they're not shy about using it. Nothing wrong with that, it's just business. Adobe either needs to innovate so that Apple has no choice but to support them, or they need to strike back by completely removing Photoshop and other creative suite functionality from Mac computers. But they've already said that that's not an option, so I guess they just have to bend over and take it.

Or, they could try and sue Apple in the EU, and force them to make something so that Apple is forced to carry/support a competitor's product...

[photon]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I tend to agree with this. There are also some other concerns like Apple doesn't want a scenario where new features in new versions of iPhone OS are stuck waiting for some 3rd-party IDE toolkit to get updated before people get to use them.

That wouldn't be Apple's problem though and they wouldn't be blamed for it, that would be up to the 3rd party toolkit. To disallow any 3rd party toolkit for this reason is pretty much unprecedented as far as I can think.

Originally Posted by FanIn80

There's really not much difference between this and what Microsoft does with some of its hardware certification stuff, and also with their whole .Net thing.

Except that there's no similarities. You can use Java to write .NET code, you can write it in Ada, Lisp, Ruby, Python, Smalltalk, Fortran, whatever you want. You can implement .NET on a completely different platform without a single piece of Microsoft stuff (Mono).

No this is completely political. If I have a compiler which compiles the Objective C code down to something, and I have another compiler that just happens to take source code in something else but compiles down to the exact same thing, then there is no reason to disallow the other thing.

Well there are reasons, but they're all irrational bordering on Kleenex boxes on my shoes territory.

Originally Posted by FanIn80

One of these days, Adobe will figure out that if they want to capitalize on Apple's work, they're going to have to buy at least one Apple computer to develop their Mac apps on. Sorry Adobe. I know you think the world should just bend over and install your PDF viewer with 17 processes that run in the background, but if you don't evolve than you lose.

It wasn't that long ago that Mac users trumpeted how much better Photoshop ran on a mac vs. a PC so this is spurious. The PDF viewer being a piece of crap on the mac has nothing to do with Adobe not buying a mac to develop on and everything to do with the PDF viewer (and every other piece of Adobe code) increasingly becoming a bloated piece of crap. It's crap on the PC too, I don't use it.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by Regorium

I guess the question is why they couldn't release the new requirements, and then Adobe can just re-integrate it into their compiler to meet the new iPhone OS standards, rather than just saying no.

Unfortunately, in this battlefield (iPhones vs. Flash), Apple has the upper hand, and it's clear that they're not shy about using it. Nothing wrong with that, it's just business. Adobe either needs to innovate so that Apple has no choice but to support them, or they need to strike back by completely removing Photoshop and other creative suite functionality from Mac computers. But they've already said that that's not an option, so I guess they just have to bend over and take it.

Or, they could try and sue Apple in the EU, and force them to make something so that Apple is forced to carry/support a competitor's product...

Adobe is trying to build an element into the Flash platform that would allow a Flash developer to export their Flash app into an iPhone app.

Apple is saying that they want iPhone apps to be developed entirely using a native platform. That means they are written and compiled in Objective-C, C or C++... not written in C# or whatever language Flash uses and then translated into an Objective-C equivalent.

Adobe keeps trying to find ways of getting their stuff onto an iPhone, and Apple just keeps telling them that the only it's going to happen is if apps are written specifically for the iPhone OS, not some generic app that's been ported to six different platforms.

There are very valid arguments to be made on both sides of the debate, but really, this move makes perfect sense for Apple and for the iPhone OS itself.

[photon]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Apple is saying that they want iPhone apps to be developed entirely using a native platform. That means they are written and compiled in Objective-C, C or C++... not written in C# or whatever language Flash uses and then translated into an Objective-C equivalent.

But that's not what Adobe's product would do, it's not translated into Objective-C equivalent, it's translated into Objective-C, then compiled like every other Objective-C code.

The only difference is it's gone through a translation process from one language to another, but that has zero impact on the final executable.

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Adobe keeps trying to find ways of getting their stuff onto an iPhone, and Apple just keeps telling them that the only it's going to happen is if apps are written specifically for the iPhone OS, not some generic app that's been ported to six different platforms.

It doesn't matter if the app can be ported to other platforms, it still is written specifically for the iPhone because it creates code that compiles with the Apple compiler and creates executable code.

Strictly speaking code completion (where you create a variable and it generates the getters and setters for you, or where it automatically generates stubs for implemented methods) would be against these rules too.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by photon

That wouldn't be Apple's problem though and they wouldn't be blamed for it, that would be up to the 3rd party toolkit. To disallow any 3rd party toolkit for this reason is pretty much unprecedented as far as I can think.



Except that there's no similarities. You can use Java to write .NET code, you can write it in Ada, Lisp, Ruby, Python, Smalltalk, Fortran, whatever you want. You can implement .NET on a completely different platform without a single piece of Microsoft stuff (Mono).

No this is completely political. If I have a compiler which compiles the Objective C code down to something, and I have another compiler that just happens to take source code in something else but compiles down to the exact same thing, then there is no reason to disallow the other thing.

Well there are reasons, but they're all irrational bordering on Kleenex boxes on my shoes territory.



It wasn't that long ago that Mac users trumpeted how much better Photoshop ran on a mac vs. a PC so this is spurious. The PDF viewer being a piece of crap on the mac has nothing to do with Adobe not buying a mac to develop on and everything to do with the PDF viewer (and every other piece of Adobe code) increasingly becoming a bloated piece of crap. It's crap on the PC too, I don't use it.

Adobe is crap software on any OS. Photoshop might run better on a Mac (although I actually prefer it on a PC), but all of their apps are garbage. I have no clue why people care so much about a company that clearly has no regard for the machines their software gets installed on.

As for the .Net stuff... are you saying I can write and compile VB apps using an environment other than .Net?

The comment about the 3rd party tool kit is valid. What happens if someone else develops some Windows IDE toolkit for developing iPhone apps? You should compare apps that are written entirely for (and on) a Mac vs apps that are written for Windows and then ported over to a Mac. They are night and day in both appearance and performance.

I'm not going to get too involved in this discussion, since there are people here who know far more about app development than I do. I can say that where I sit right now, I have zero problems with forcing people to code iPhone apps in Xcode, using the toolkits that Apple provides. From everything I've heard, the Apple-provided SDKs are some of the best in the world.

[FanIn80]

Originally Posted by photon

But that's not what Adobe's product would do, it's not translated into Objective-C equivalent, it's translated into Objective-C, then compiled like every other Objective-C code.

The only difference is it's gone through a translation process from one language to another, but that has zero impact on the final executable.



It doesn't matter if the app can be ported to other platforms, it still is written specifically for the iPhone because it creates code that compiles with the Apple compiler and creates executable code.

Strictly speaking code completion (where you create a variable and it generates the getters and setters for you, or where it automatically generates stubs for implemented methods) would be against these rules too.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the issue. I see this as Apple telling developers that, if they want to build iPhone apps, they have to do it on a Mac using the tools and languages that Apple provides for it. They can't build an app for the Blackberry and then just export is as an iPhone app when it was never written for the iPhone to begin with.

I don't get how something written in Flash can just be magically translated to work on the iPhone. Wouldn't you have to write the thing from the ground up using Apple's APIs? Like how can Apple trust that Adobe's "Save As... iPhone App" button will recode the Flash app to correctly use everything that Apple requires it to? What happens when Apple puts out a new OS and people are still using Flash CS5 to compile iPhone apps which aren't built properly for iPhone OS 5?

It may piss some people off, and this honestly isn't me trying to go out of my way to defend Apple (why would I here?), but I really don't have a problem with this change. At the end of the day, all I care about is a quality OS running quality apps. I honestly don't care if Flash developers can't just save their apps as an iPhone app.

Again, if I'm completely off-base on this, I'll shut up and let others with more knowledge of what's actually happening figure this out. I'm in the early stages of learning dev terms, and I am more than outmatched in terms of knowledge in this area by more than a few people here.