Slashdot Mirror


iPhone OS 4.0 Brings Multitasking, Ad Framework For Apps

Low Ranked Craig writes "Apple had an event today to show off the next major update to the iPhone OS. iPhone OS 4.0 should arrive this summer (presumably with a new iPhone) for iPhone and iPod Touch, and in the fall for the iPad. According to Apple the update has more than 1,500 new APIs and 100 new features including the sorely missed multitasking. Other highlights include unified inbox, improved security, support for multiple Exchange accounts, application folders, iBooks, and iAd, an advertising framework for developers to put ads in their applications. The official word from Steve on Flash and Java remains a simple 'No.'" Updated 20100408 22:09 GMT by timothy: Read on for more information, including some bad news if you want to program for the iPhone in C# or Flash CS5. alphadogg points out some what he calls surprise capabilities targeted at enterprise users and IT departments, including e-mail encryption and "mobile device management."

And CWmike adds more infomation at MacWorld about iAd, which he considers the biggest news in today’s announcement, writing that one way to look at the new advertising hooks "is that Apple can now leverage the App Store/iTunes ‘ecosystem’ lock-in in effect, and deliver to advertisers a huge captive audience."

Finally, binarylarry writes with a look from Daring Fireball at the new user agreement that goes along with 4.0: "Looks like Adobe's release of CS5 with the Flash-to-native compiler has been nixed by Apple's new user agreement: '3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs.'"

983 comments

  1. No ads please by Matt+Perry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ads on mobile phone? DO NOT WANT. Unless I get a free phone and free service, but even then I'm not sure if I could tolerate it.

    --
    Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    1. Re:No ads please by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The ads are for the apps that choose to use them, not for the phone service.

      Like them or hate them, the more money Apple funnels towards the developers, the better software support it will have. If it's successful expect Android to follow suit.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:No ads please by _xeno_ · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's for apps that already have ads, such as the NPR app. ("NPR is brought to you commercial free by the partner whose banner ad is covering half the screen.")

      Basically it's a unified ad service for smaller developers who don't have the resources to roll their own. You won't suddenly see ads on your iPhone unless you download ad-supported apps.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    3. Re:No ads please by Kenja · · Score: 5, Funny

      On the plus side, with multi-tasking you'll be able to get several ads at once! Just image the fun times you'll have searching through your running apps trying to find the one that has the "congratulations! you're a winner!" sound file on constant loop.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    4. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Its a unified ad service to give Apple 40% of the pie.

      Expect apps using home rolled ad solutions to be bounced

    5. Re:No ads please by beakerMeep · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're right, but expect that line to get blurred over time. Look at PBS and NPR: they dont have ads, but they do. Google is starting to do this now with Google maps on Android. They put sponsored links in the search results. While fine and noninvasive in it's present form, over time I would fully expect them to get more invasive until it is as saturated as Television. No corporation can resist a new avenue for advertising revenue. Hell, even nonprofits like NPR/PBS can't.

      --
      meep
    6. Re:No ads please by Microlith · · Score: 1

      The catch is that if it's easy to slap ads in your app, expect more to do so. And that's fine if Android follows suit, since you aren't locked into the Android Marketplace.

    7. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um... admobs.....

    8. Re:No ads please by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Devs are going to follow the money. It doesn't matter if you're locked into the Android Marketplace or not.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    9. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Or its easy to have adfree and ad supported versions of the same program. Adfree is a driving force for people paying for a "Pro" version of many apps.

    10. Re:No ads please by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      iAd

      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot. It's iPhone 4.0 today and OSX 11 tomorrow. And it will still be irresistibly shiny.

      You slashdotters out there: did you first get into computing and technology in order to consume more advertising and to have someone else tell you which software to run? Or did you turn to technology and computing in rejection of advertising and lockdowns (aka "command and control")? When you first got into computing and technology did you learn more from the gear that you had to fiddle with or the gear that "just worked"?

      I swear to you by all that is holy, by the time this is over, we're going to regret having been in such an all-consuming hurry to suck the iDick.

      Watch and See.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    11. Re:No ads please by Threni · · Score: 0, Troll

      Yeah, I can't wait for Google to implement multitasking, live wallpaper etc into Android.

    12. Re:No ads please by e065c8515d206cb0e190 · · Score: 0

      OS X 11 or OS XI?

    13. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not one word of your reply had to do with anything that was said. Fanboy much?

    14. Re:No ads please by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Its a unified ad service to give Apple 40% of the pie.

      Expect apps using home rolled ad solutions to be bounced

      It's a unified ad service to keep the information gathered by an ad service out of Google's hands.

    15. Re:No ads please by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot.

      Yes, they're laughing because you're woefully misinformed (or maybe just a troll). Apple has a very good thing going with developers and OS X -- and it's a completely different from their consumer electronic business because it's a completely different market. Many devs love OS X but wouldn't be caught dead with an iPhone or iPad. Many iPad or iPhone users are looking forward to the day they can replace their computer with an iPpliance -- totally different markets.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    16. Re:No ads please by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I swear to you by all that is holy, by the time this is over, we're going to regret having been in such an all-consuming hurry to suck the iDick.

      Not all of us are.. some people saw this coming a while ago.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    17. Re:No ads please by tgibbs · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you don't want apps with ads, don't download them. As with computer software, it is likely that many apps will be available in free versions without ads and also in paid, add-free versions.

    18. Re:No ads please by anarche · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yep. Working on my first android app atm, and I'll be releasing working out how to use adds.

      Or you can buy the ad-free version :D

      --
      Wait! Whats a sig?
    19. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One doesn't have to be a fan-boi to be an Apple Hater.

    20. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Informative

      This already exists in the App Store, but the feature has to be coded specifically per-app. This adds an API to make it easier to implement. It will not be universal, but will likely be used for "lite" apps that exist on the store (as they do now, for free) that have a more fully featured paid version. This makes it easier to add an ad-supported stream to your free app, and not have to source the ad providers yourself.

      OS X will continue as it always has.

    21. Re:No ads please by Microlith · · Score: 1

      Lack of lock-in means I can find and use an alternative without ads. Or better yet, use an open source alternative if one exists. iPhone users have no such choice.

    22. Re:No ads please by dimeglio · · Score: 1

      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot. It's iPhone 4.0 today and OSX 11 tomorrow. And it will still be irresistibly shiny.

      iMacs will be Macs and iPad, iPhone will be their own thing. I see the next logical step towards a set-top box. Probably to replace the AppleTV. The remote control would be, you guessed-it, an "dumbed down" iPhone.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    23. Re:No ads please by eugene2k · · Score: 1

      It'll be pretty hard to "follow suit" since Apple has patented their method of showing ads.

      --
      Apple has "Mac vs PC", Microsoft has "Laptop Hunters", Linux has recession
    24. Re:No ads please by Flipao · · Score: 3, Funny

      They came first for the iPhones but I didn't speak up for I was too hip for an iPhone And then they came for the iPads, And I didn’t speak up because they are completely different markets. And then . . . they came for Mac OS. . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.

    25. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah because running around posting about how much you hate a company is soOOOoo much cooler than being a fanboy. Bet you're fun on a date!

    26. Re:No ads please by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since nothing is holy, your swearing is pure theatre.

      In any case, it's not like Apple owns the entire PC market, phone market, or consumer electronics market. They simply don't have the power to dictate the sorts of things you are warning about. They can provide it as a choice, but that's not really an issue unless you are one of those people who believes that everyone should only have the choices you've blessed. If that is indeed the case, you're fucked and always have been. Sorry if I am the one to break it to you.

    27. Re:No ads please by AresTheImpaler · · Score: 5, Insightful
      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot. It's iPhone 4.0 today and OSX 11 tomorrow.

      the ads are for those applications that want to make money thru ads. If developers dont want them, even on their free application, they dont have to include them. The whole thing is so that if you want to include ads, they have some hooks on the SDK so that it's easy for the developer.
      also, about app store lockdown, I seriously doubt it. In fact, when steam announced that they were releasing a mac client, appleinsider interviewed them (link here). John Cook from Valve was asked if Apple was helping them. He replied:
      "Cook: Yes, we've been working with them a bunch as we get more acquainted with their platform. They've been a great partner so far and we look forward to growing our relationship with them over time."
      So yeah, even tho some slashdot trolls and some slashdot haters do not like apple and make up stuff, what you said, it's not going to happen.

      Watch and See

    28. Re:No ads please by Flipao · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You won't suddenly see ads on your iPhone unless you download ad-supported apps.

      Funny you say that, because Steve Jobs said he expects every iPhone user to sit through 10 ads a day.

    29. Re:No ads please by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 5, Funny

      But I deserve free apps with no ads! I'm not sure why I deserve it, or how I can force people to provide what I desire, but I'm gonna whine while I'm not getting my way.

    30. Re:No ads please by guspasho · · Score: 1

      "It's for apps that already have ads, such as the NPR app."

      "Basically it's a unified ad service for smaller developers who don't have the resources to roll their own."

      Which is it? For the apps that already have ads or the apps by smaller developers who didn't have the resources to implement ads before?

    31. Re:No ads please by Nick+Ives · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Apple has a very good thing going with developers and OS X

      And an even better thing going with the iPad and the iPhone.

      If Apple decides that it's more profitable to have a locked down desktop that can only install apps from the app store then they'll do it. It wouldn't surprise me if they locked down iMac and left the Mac Pro for people who want to use professional applications.

      Having said that, why wouldn't Apple put Final Cut on the app store if that's how they wanted their desktops to be run? If Apple decided to lock down, who's to say Adobe wouldn't just go with the flow and distribute Photoshop that way too?

      --
      Nick
    32. Re:No ads please by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Following the money means devs will focus their energies on where it's profitable. Make it dirt simple to do and the iPhone becomes a more attractive platform. Sway enough dev-work their way, Google responds with their own. Thus not being able to get away from it.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    33. Re:No ads please by DJRumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course iPhone users have a choice. The ratings for apps are right there on the app page, along with user comments. If they get abusive with ads (and there are already some apps that tried this), the users complain, and the app gets a low rating. Since there are more apps than you can throw a phone at, it's rarely difficult to find one you like, even among the free offerings.

      "Lack of lock-in means I can find and use an alternative without ads. Or better yet, use an open source alternative if one exists. iPhone users have no such choice."

    34. Re:No ads please by Karlt1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You slashdotters out there: did you first get into computing and technology in order to consume more advertising and to have someone else tell you which software to run?

      So do you really think that Google is supporting Android for any other reason than to supply advertising? Their whole business strategy is based on ads. Microsoft is even placing ads in their bundled apps for the Zune.

    35. Re:No ads please by bonch · · Score: 1

      Don't be so reactionary. This is for those free and $0.99 apps that are already ad-supported. If you don't want the ads, buy the full version of the app.

    36. Re:No ads please by guspasho · · Score: 1

      So is that all that OS X is good for now? Developers?

    37. Re:No ads please by bonch · · Score: 1

      Are you retarded? How are those two things mutually exclusive?

      It's for apps that are ad-supported, be they existing apps or future apps that small developers wouldn't have the resources to develop ad systems for.

    38. Re:No ads please by clang_jangle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For one thing OS X is a *nix, with full shell/root access. Tricky to lock that down, not to mention all the people who use it because of that would quickly switch to Linux.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    39. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      did you first get into computing and technology in order to consume more advertising and to have someone else tell you which software to run? Or did you turn to technology and computing in rejection of advertising and lockdowns

      Neither.

      I got into computing and technology because it was fricking fun to write and play 3000-line adventure games with my friends in BASIC on a PET2001 -- which, by the way, just worked.

      I personally don't care about advertising. It doesn't bother me one bit in the grand scheme of things, since I'm capable of tuning them out. If the ads in a particular context bother me, then I avoid that context.

      When you first got into computing and technology did you learn more from the gear that you had to fiddle with or the gear that "just worked"?

      Seems to me like your core issue is the idea of a computer as an appliance.

      Why not use computer appliances for what they're designed for, and scratch your tinkering itch somewhere else? It's not like Apple is the alpha and omega of computing.

      There's plenty of room for tech consumers and tech tinkerers alike in this world. Do Apple's offerings really limit your ability to tinker and learn?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    40. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because they are totally different markets.

      Does make all their cars like the GT40 because that's the one with the biggest profit margin? No, they sell a variety of products that meet different needs, much like Apple does.

      The iPhone/iPad market is not the same as the OS X market.

      Having bought 10 or 11 copies of Final Cut Studio over the years, they wouldn't go with an app store model because the install is approximately 80 gigs if you install everything, including the loops, fonts and other assets that you can use in Motion projects, DVD projects, Soundtrack etc. Plus, the box it comes in is about 6 inches thick and 90% is filled by the printed manuals (although they also provide all those manuals as PDFs on the disks). I'm not downloading that over the internet.

      Different markets.

    41. Re:No ads please by CdBee · · Score: 1

      We might just find that in the middle-distance future, MacBooks and iMacs will have iPhone OS instead of Mac OS

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    42. Re:No ads please by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      It'll be pretty hard to "follow suit" since Apple has patented [slashdot.org] their method of showing ads.

      Read the TFA in the article you linked to. iAd is *not* what that patent covers.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    43. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Why did slashdot eat the word "Ford" from my post. I remember typing it because I originally put "Frod" and corrected myself inline. Weird.

    44. Re:No ads please by medcalf · · Score: 1

      A lot of iPhone apps have ads now. What typically happens is that developers release a free, unlimited version with ads, and a paid, unlimited version without ads. Then you can either pay, or take the ads. Choice is good.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    45. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Good point.

      If you're going to choose between two apps for the same task, many people will choose the free-as-in-beer app supported by ads instead of shelling out $5-$20 for the non-ad-supported app.

      This might be a good thing, though, since then people will have more choices. It might suck for some devs, though, since they'll see fewer users and less cash unless they too put ads in their products.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    46. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Expect apps using home rolled ad solutions to be bounced

      Except that Steve Jobs specifically said during the Q&A developers were free to use other ad services. But don't let facts get in the way of a good troll.

    47. Re:No ads please by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      iOS Xi, pronounced "zee". Because it is more pretentious that way.

    48. Re:No ads please by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      Tricky to lock that down

      Sure, tricky to lock it down for power users, but very few mac users that I see are what I would class as "power users" - They bought their Banana Jr. 6000s because they wanted a computer that was easy to use that doesn't crash... So while *locking* it down would be unlikley, "latching" it down would probably be pretty easy, and for the majority of users "latching" is probably sufficient.

    49. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Either, both. It just means you don;t have to code something specifically for your ads (if you already have an app), and will be able to add them more easily (if you have a new app).

      It allows apps that already have ads to change the source slightly to cut out any "home rolled" code that the OS itself now duplicates.

    50. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And when they eventually put the ads in the full price apps, then what?

    51. Re:No ads please by guspasho · · Score: 1

      Your first statement gave me the impression that you were arguing iAds wouldn't result in the proliferation of ads in more apps. Sorry about that.

    52. Re:No ads please by tomhudson · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      They came first for the iPhones but I didn't speak up for I was too hip for an iPhone And then they came for the iPads, And I didn't speak up because they are completely different markets. And then . . . they came for Mac OS. . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.

      Well, now that the Apple iPhone To Get Same Features As Windows 3.0 20 Years Ago, maybe it's time to switch to a system that is truly both free and libre ... just use any Window Manager other than GNOME.

      No wonder Apple killed the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ads ... nothing left to steal from each other (just JOKING ... kind of ... :-)

    53. Re:No ads please by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hmmm, I wonder who left this lying around here.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    54. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Very well put. I've been preaching this message for years. Microsoft got such a lot of flack for anti-competitive behavior in the past. The time is past-due for Apple to be investigated for the same. Everyone is in search of a quick buck and rolls over for the promise of quick riches - developers, content providers, etc. This has to stop, and stop soon.

    55. Re:No ads please by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot. It's iPhone 4.0 today and OSX 11 tomorrow. And it will still be irresistibly shiny.

      So are you saying we'll just be switching out our Microsoft Clones for Apple Zombies?

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    56. Re:No ads please by causality · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I personally don't care about advertising. It doesn't bother me one bit in the grand scheme of things, since I'm capable of tuning them out. If the ads in a particular context bother me, then I avoid that context.

      I wonder if you're aware that you're making excuses. The real objection is not about whether you like to see ads or don't like to see ads. No. The objection is that the moment you see a single ad you did not wish to see, you have lost control over the device. That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying. That's why personal preferences towards advertising are completely irrelevant.

      For something like broadcast TV or broadcast radio, that's acceptable, since it costs money to produce those things and you are viewing ads instead of paying a bill. You are obtaining something of value to offset the cost of watching ads. That makes it a fair exchange. However, when you are paying for a phone, phone service, and the application, and still see ads, this is no longer justifiable. It's a form of double-dipping. Thus, it's an adversarial way of relating to your customers because it amounts to taking advantage of them.

      It has nothing to do with whether anyone likes ads. It has to do with the fact that a company is making money from ad revenue without earning that money by providing something of value in return. If you're already paying for it on your own, they are failing to do this but are still collecting ad revenues. It's foolish to reward this behavior because it's parasitic in nature. Do you ever wonder why there are so many companies that take advantage, exploit, and find ways to screw people over? It's because we reward them with our business.

      The only time this would be acceptable would be for free apps that would otherwise cost money. Please read this quote from the summary and tell me whether you believe Apple is going to restrict these ad functions to free apps only (emphasis mine):

      And CWmike adds more infomation at MacWorld about iAd, which he considers the biggest news in today’s announcement, writing that one way to look at the new advertising hooks "is that Apple can now leverage the App Store/iTunes ‘ecosystem’ lock-in in effect, and deliver to advertisers a huge captive audience."

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    57. Re:No ads please by geekoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      " Many devs love OS X but wouldn't be caught dead with an iPhone or iPa"

      anecdotally, I find that not to be true. Pretty much every programmer I know that works on OSX has an iPhone.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    58. Re:No ads please by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      For one thing OS X is a *nix, with full shell/root access. Tricky to lock that down, not to mention all the people who use it because of that would quickly switch to Linux.

      While I don't use it specifically because of that, I would be strongly tempted to go over to Linux if that were the case.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    59. Re:No ads please by AresTheImpaler · · Score: 4, Funny

      god damn it man, why did you take away my , totally uncool....

    60. Re:No ads please by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Apple has a very good thing going with developers and OS X

      Does apple even care about personal computers any more?

      The last noteworthy computer they announced was the Air (which in retrospect seems like a super-advanced iPad that was largely ignored).

    61. Re:No ads please by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you're aware that you're making excuses. The real objection is not about whether you like to see ads or don't like to see ads. No. The objection is that the moment you see a single ad you did not wish to see, you have lost control over the device. That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying. That's why personal preferences towards advertising are completely irrelevant.

      I'd be pretty ticked if ads popped up in pay apps, I'm hoping Apple will have a policy concerning that--no double dipping. I'm fine with free apps having ads on them. Just because someone is making their app freely available doesn't mean that there wasn't a significant amount of development put into it. Plus many free apps are doing this already, probably a lot less effectively than what iAd will provide.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    62. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      iMacs will be Macs and iPad, iPhone will be their own thing.

      I'd like to see iMacs get the iPhone OS in addition to the full OS X. It would be great if users could have the option to boot into either OS. My MBP currently sleeps most of the time so that I get near instant on, but I might shut it down more often if I knew I could boot the iPhone OS quickly and pull up a page in Safari.

      I'm unlikely to buy a device that doesn't have the full OS X, but the iPhone OS isn't inherently limiting, it's only a limitation when it's the only OS available to the device. I see it as being very similar to Chrome OS. I wouldn't want it as my primary OS, but I'd love to have it as a dual boot option to save time when I don't need a fully-featured OS to accomplish my computing tasks.

    63. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OSX 11 tomorrow

      The X stands for 10. So, you meant OSXI?

    64. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple has a very good thing going with developers...

      Unless you consider that "The latest revision of Apple's developer licensing agreement explicitly prohibits the use of third-party software to develop for the iPhone." -- [Daring Fireball]

    65. Re:No ads please by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't surprise me if they locked down iMac and left the Mac Pro for people who want to use professional applications.

      Exactly what I'm thinking. You'll have to pay >$3000 if you want to do what you want with your own system.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    66. Re:No ads please by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Final Cut Studio is a great example of how the two markets are different. The iGadgets are for the consumption of media content. Macintoshes are for the creation of media. What could possibly be gained by locking down the latter like is done on the former?

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    67. Re:No ads please by Zakabog · · Score: 1

      If it's successful expect Android to follow suit.

      Follow suit? I already have ads in some of my apps (Hi AIM, and Hi MSN come to mind immediately.) They're unobtrusive and the apps were free anyway. I don't mind these small text based google ads on these apps if that's what it takes to get them free.

    68. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read that as iOsexy in bad leet. If such a thing occurs it is like admitting the only thing it is good for is looks

    69. Re:No ads please by BitHive · · Score: 3, Funny

      People are laughing because you sound like the Glenn Beck of computing trends.

    70. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I wonder if you're aware that you're making excuses. The real objection is not about whether you like to see ads or don't like to see ads. No. The objection is that the moment you see a single ad you did not wish to see, you have lost control over the device. That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying. That's why personal preferences towards advertising are completely irrelevant.

      False. That's your objection, not mine. My objection would have nothing to do with control. It has to do with functionality. If the appliance does what I want from it, I have no problem. There are no excuses involved, since there is nothing to excuse.

      That makes it a fair exchange. However, when you are paying for a phone, phone service, and the application, and still see ads, this is no longer justifiable. It's a form of double-dipping. Thus, it's an adversarial way of relating to your customers because it amounts to taking advantage of them.

      And yet millions of people pay for cable television, or for magazines, which still have ads in them. I fail to see the problem. When people have the choice of services or appliances to use, then the problem solves itself. Content servers find a way to operate profitably with some kind of split revenue from customer billing and from ad revenues. Why shouldn't ad serving subsidize subscription cost?

      It has nothing to do with whether anyone likes ads. It has to do with the fact that a company is making money from ad revenue without earning that money by providing something of value in return.

      I don't understand. You can freely choose not to accept the services of that company, and not have to see any ads from them. Bully for you -- stand by your principles and don't do business with that company. Meanwhile, the fact that the company has two separate revenue streams doesn't bother me -- our CHOICE is to evaluate whether the service provided is worth the cost, where the cost includes the inconvenience or annoyance of ads, and the cash we lay out to the company.

      Do you ever wonder why there are so many companies that take advantage, exploit, and find ways to screw people over? It's because we reward them with our business.

      And that's our individual choice to make. You place a high value on maintaining "control" of your devices, or on not needing to see ads. I don't. So when presented with the same choice, you and I may choose differently. The market sorts out what business model is successful, not your personal value system.

      It's foolish to reward this behavior because it's parasitic in nature.

      That's silly. All profit-seeking enterprise is parasitic in nature if you look at it that way.

      The only time this would be acceptable would be for free apps that would otherwise cost money. Please read this quote from the summary and tell me whether you believe Apple is going to restrict these ad functions to free apps only

      No need to re-read, since I disagree with your premise. Why should we not have a choice between apps that are free and ad-laden, expensive and ad-free, or some other combination? Why does it have to be black-and-white? Why can't I choose an app that gives me what I believe to be the best service, but costs me some cash and also serves ads? Why not let the market decide which model (or even likely multiple models) is out there for me to choose from?

      And for that matter, so what if this were to go to the ridiculous extreme and Apple requires all apps to serve ads, or they won't get approved? So what? Then you can simply not use an Apple appliance. Nothing is forcing you to do business with them.

      Seriously, I don't understand where you're coming from. Because of a set of values YOU hold, that are far from universal, you want to limit the choices available to me as a consumer, and to developers also?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    71. Re:No ads please by node+3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot. It's iPhone 4.0 today and OSX 11 tomorrow. And it will still be irresistibly shiny.

      And we're still laughing at you, because it's an imbecilic notion. Apple is *not* going to lock down OS X any time soon. To think they are is to follow the same brain-damaged logic that the teabaggers follow when they say that government healthcare will lead to "death panels" and forced euthanasia.

    72. Re:No ads please by Wovel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have no evidence other than my own anecdotal experience, but MACs tend to be used by the two extremes of the user community, the power-users and the newbies. I would imagine the percentage of the mac community that could be objectively called "power-users" is significantly higher for OSX than Windows.

    73. Re:No ads please by node+3 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      We might just find that in the middle-distance future, MacBooks and iMacs will have iPhone OS instead of Mac OS

      iPhone OS is a multitouch OS designed for limited devices. It does *NOT* support a mouse *AT ALL*. There is absolutely *ZERO* chance that Apple will replace Mac OS X with iPhone OS on their notebooks or their desktop computers.

      This line of thought that is so prevalent amongst Slashdotters shows just how abysmally stupid far too many geeks are these days.

    74. Re:No ads please by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So use FOSS software. On a PC you can do that, not so much on the I$thing

    75. Re:No ads please by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      They're laughing because you're trolling hard based on nothing more than cynicism.

      You see one product line and assume that all product lines are going that way. There's no rationale behind your assumption, you're just waving your hands and hoping people are too distracted by the movements to notice that you're just making stuff up.

      What happened to /. ? I started reading around the 200K user ID mark (didn't register for another 600K) and somewhere around 1M it went to trolling hell. It used to be just GNAA trolling and abuse trolls. Now it's flavour-of-the-month trolling. This month, it's cool to hate Apple. You'll get easy mod points. Last month it was Microsoft. Next month... maybe back to Microsoft, or keep flaming Apple? So many choices, so few intelligent comments.

      If you want to spend all your days keeping your machines working, go nuts. I did that in the 80s (when some of us soldered the damn things together as the first step), I kept Windows and MacOS running in the 90s and I keep them running well today. I don't feel that system maintenance is worth any of my time whatsoever.

      Apple are offering something new. Why not talk about where that can go, or better yet, leave Apple out of the equation (which is easy with all their screw-ups) and think about new ways to use computers. Too many /.'ers just can't think of anything outside their little box of "but this is how I've always done it" and damn but that's sad.

      I think it's time to drop /. from my bookmarks. Other sites present better, more informed discussions with better moderation of trolls. Other sites present the news earlier, and actually give an article instead of a link.

      This place is dead to me now. It's all bitching and no substance, and the trolls are modded up when they say nothing at all.

    76. Re:No ads please by nofx_3 · · Score: 1

      The home solutions already exist, they are already in many apps I have used (I've seen many ad-mod banners in fact). I bet 40% is similar to what companies like ad-mod take, plus Apple provides you API's to easily add the functionality to you app. Plus the ads don't kick you out of your application if you click on them. It's not any worse than the current solutions and in some ways it's better. iAd is only bad if it ends up encouraging a huge number of apps that didn't intend to have ads to include them just because it's easy and they might make a few extra bucks.

      --
      Visualize Whirled Peas
    77. Re:No ads please by Wovel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You used a lot of words to say "I don't understand what this discussion is about"

      The ads are in APPS, not in the general use of the phone. The developers have a choice to include ads or not in their apps and you have the choice to buy or not buy APPS with ADS in them. It is actually acceptable for any app developers who wants to include ads in their app. You are always free to purchase the app or not purchase the app.

    78. Re:No ads please by deniable · · Score: 1

      There are II kinds of people in the world, those that understand Roman numerals...

    79. Re:No ads please by nofx_3 · · Score: 1

      I'd estimate I see somewhere near that already. A lot of apps have used them relatively unobtrusively, for instance on their menu or loading screens. iAd at least doesn't boot you from you app if you touch an add accidentally.

      --
      Visualize Whirled Peas
    80. Re:No ads please by Wovel · · Score: 2

      The APP store will not require ads, and there are tons of apps that already have ads. I suppose if Apple said "All APPS must have ADs", you might have a point. They did not say anything like that.

    81. Re:No ads please by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      Yes, because shoveling money at developers always results in higher quality software. :::coughcough microsoft.com :::coughcough:::

    82. Re:No ads please by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      "You won't suddenly see ads on your iPhone unless you download ad-supported apps."

      Please see cable television and satellite radio for history that disproves your hypothesis.

      Bonus: Those examples also dealt with mass media content delivery!

    83. Re:No ads please by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Because he expects most iphone users will find ad supported Apps they want to use.

    84. Re:No ads please by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I concur, developers owe us all free applications with no possibility of generating any revenue.

    85. Re:No ads please by nofx_3 · · Score: 1

      Those apps will get terrible ratings and very few sales. I've seen this happen many times on the app store already, the consumer still has some control, they aren't FORCED to buy every app.

      --
      Visualize Whirled Peas
    86. Re:No ads please by BronsCon · · Score: 0

      Apple has a very good thing going with developers...

      Unless you consider that "The latest revision of Apple's developer licensing agreement explicitly prohibits the use of third-party software to develop for the iPhone." -- [Daring Fireball]

      Unless you consider

      and OS X

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    87. Re:No ads please by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Yes, because shoveling money at developers always results in higher quality software. :::coughcough microsoft.com :::coughcough:::

      I'm curious why you don't think that argument works against your point.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    88. Re:No ads please by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Yes, they're laughing because you're woefully misinformed

      People laughed at the Czechs when they said Hitler was going to invade, they laughed and waved about a peice of paper.

      Apple has a very good thing going with developers and OS X

      You're assuming Apple cares about a minority audience. All apple has to do is provide the same dev tools in a similarly locked down environment. Why do you see this as some kind of hurdle, in fact it should make it easier for apple to control developers by ensuring that all the developers applications are automatically signed (thus ensuring that they wont work on another dev's machine, unless you have a site license).

      totally different markets.

      This to Apple is a bad thing(TM). It destroys the homogeneity if they have to write "Does not work on Ipad/OSX" on the box, I mean that just doesn't work.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    89. Re:No ads please by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      The real objection is not about whether you like to see ads or don't like to see ads. No. The objection is that the moment you see a single ad you did not wish to see, you have lost control over the device. That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying.

      So you don't own your radio or television?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    90. Re:No ads please by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      Time to jailbreak that iPad and block the IP addresses of those sites that feed ads.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    91. Re:No ads please by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      It's for apps that already have ads, such as the NPR app. ("NPR is brought to you commercial free by the partner whose banner ad is covering half the screen.")

      Basically it's a unified ad service for smaller developers who don't have the resources to roll their own. You won't suddenly see ads on your iPhone unless you download ad-supported apps.

      Which will explode in numbers now that its so easy. Just like the web has become..

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    92. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So wait, because they a lacking a sub $1000 gaming laptop, they have no variety? Despite selling laptops, a small PC, an all in one and a tower?

      The new Macbook is reasonable with a 9400M - there's a video of someone putting it through its paces on youtube with Oblivion and TF2 on high settings. Hardly cutting edge, but then why are you looking at Apple if you want a dedicated mobile gaming rig? Laptops with hefty GPUs are available from other suppliers.

      My point was that their computer market is different from their commodity handset/tablet market, and that a business model in one does not automatically mean that business model is used in the other. They can sell two different business models without having to homogenise.

    93. Re:No ads please by gcerullo · · Score: 1

      Well, Dell, HP, Sony, Toshiba and the myriad of other PC clone makers have been filling hard drives with "trial-ware" for years yet people continue to buy PCs. Apple, on the other hand, has never resorted to such tactics.

      What, in their past history, makes you think that Apple would resort to such tactics. If anything, I can see the low margin PC cloners learning by this example and resorting to this as their margins continue to get squeezed.

    94. Re:No ads please by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It will be the first reason I jailbreak my phone.

      because someone will make a iAD's blocker. and I'll jump on that like flies to a turd...

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    95. Re:No ads please by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dude I dont call pop-up ad's a desierable feature.... you windows fanbois are incredibly strange.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    96. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Durrrrr helLOOO dingus, straw man much?

    97. Re:No ads please by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      It's not that you deserve free apps, but society deserves them, because the marginal cost of a new copy of an app is basically zero. Charging money for general-purpose software is a sign that there's an economic inefficiency somewhere and that society could be better off, theoretically somehow.

      Of course, if you replace that with some system like "all software is free by law" you probably will get a different sort of economic inefficiency, because not many people will be writing the apps, at least in the short run. Don't you love economic problems without easy answers? (cf. also: geographic monopoly).

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    98. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd drop it in a second if they took away my shell. I don't use any of the built-in apps like iMovie or iPhoto.

    99. Re:No ads please by causality · · Score: 1

      And yet millions of people pay for cable television, or for magazines, which still have ads in them. I fail to see the problem. When people have the choice of services or appliances to use, then the problem solves itself. Content servers find a way to operate profitably with some kind of split revenue from customer billing and from ad revenues. Why shouldn't ad serving subsidize subscription cost?

      So because many people will go along with something and will not oppose it on principle, and therefore precedent for it exists, that automatically means it's not exploitative and is not an instance of double-dipping?

      And for that matter, so what if this were to go to the ridiculous extreme and Apple requires all apps to serve ads, or they won't get approved? So what? Then you can simply not use an Apple appliance. Nothing is forcing you to do business with them.

      You seem to so badly need to make this a matter of taste or preference. No. I oppose this not because I find it distasteful, or like something better. I'm sorry you automatically assume everything is that shallow. I oppose it because I believe it's wrong.

      Seriously, I don't understand where you're coming from. Because of a set of values YOU hold, that are far from universal, you want to limit the choices available to me as a consumer, and to developers also?

      What have I limited? Back this up, please. I have not been calling for the government to use force to stop them. I have not in any way tried to prevent anyone from doing what they like. What I have done is explain that I won't be going along with this, and that I did not arrive at that decision by flipping a coin. It's the case for several good reasons.

      Your need to trivialize this by making it a matter of taste or preference, ignoring my principled objection, and acting like I am somehow limiting anyone by speaking my mind weakens your argument more than I likely could.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    100. Re:No ads please by causality · · Score: 1

      The real objection is not about whether you like to see ads or don't like to see ads. No. The objection is that the moment you see a single ad you did not wish to see, you have lost control over the device. That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying.

      So you don't own your radio or television?

      That's cute. I own the device, yes. That device can play both programming I have to pay money for, like store-bought DVDs, or it can play programming I don't have to pay money for, like broadcast TV. I likened that to the device of the iPhone and the "programming" of the apps.

      Still waiting for a substantive response to my actual objections. So far people just want to quibble over semantics.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    101. Re:No ads please by causality · · Score: 1

      The ads are in APPS, not in the general use of the phone. The developers have a choice to include ads or not in their apps and you have the choice to buy or not buy APPS with ADS in them. It is actually acceptable for any app developers who wants to include ads in their app. You are always free to purchase the app or not purchase the app.

      I said it's parasitic behavior and that it would be foolish to reward this behavior. Nowhere did I say anyone should be prevented from doing anything. If people would like to do something foolish, it's not my job to stop them, but it's still foolish. This concept just can't be that hard to understand.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    102. Re:No ads please by feepness · · Score: 1

      What could possibly be gained by locking down the latter like is done on the former?

      A cut of the price of the software for Apple.

    103. Re:No ads please by dingen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For one thing OS X is a *nix, with full shell/root access. Tricky to lock that down

      Well they seem to have locked up the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad pretty good though. Same OS X kernel, same Unix, just a different userland.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    104. Re:No ads please by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Dude I dont call pop-up ad's a desierable (sic) feature.... you windows fanbois are incredibly strange.

      Three problems:

      1. "Dude"??? Please see my profile :-)
      2. I'm not advocating ANY ads being desirable.
      3. How does saying "switch to linux" make me a fan of windows?

      Sure, I slagged Ubuntu, but that's because it's Ubuntu ... it even looks crappy.

    105. Re:No ads please by adavies42 · · Score: 1

      you do realize that writing it "MAC" instantly destroys all your credibility, don't you?

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    106. Re:No ads please by adavies42 · · Score: 1

      this is an anti-apple story, of course they're taking away the i's....

      --
      Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
      -kfg
    107. Re:No ads please by feepness · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Cook: Yes, we've been working with them a bunch as we get more acquainted with their platform. They've been a great partner so far and we look forward to growing our relationship with them over time."

      Ah, the embrace phase of embrace, extend, extinguish.

    108. Re:No ads please by kainewynd2 · · Score: 1

      you do realize that writing it "MAC" instantly destroys all your credibility, don't you?

      --
      Made on a Mac
      -kfg

      There, fixed that for you. :p

      --
      I just don't get... eh, ugh... never mind. This post wasn't worth the research I put into it.
    109. Re:No ads please by kainewynd2 · · Score: 1

      A cut of the price of the software for Apple.

      Apple makes Final Cut Studio... they already get all of the profits.

      --
      I just don't get... eh, ugh... never mind. This post wasn't worth the research I put into it.
    110. Re:No ads please by kainewynd2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm just saying, don't claim variety if they can't even deliver a good system that fits a whole sub-market.

      Absolutely! I call foul on the lack of furry friendly devices from Apple! Until they give me something that can work with my oversized unicorn gloves, I won't buy a thing from them!
      /sarcasm...
      No, really. /sarcasm. I just don't get... eh, ugh... never mind. This post wasn't worth the research I put into it.

      --
      I just don't get... eh, ugh... never mind. This post wasn't worth the research I put into it.
    111. Re:No ads please by medcalf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Markets are wonderful. Apple won't have to restrict this to pay ads, because the market will refuse to accept for-pay applications with ads. It has in fact already done exactly that. When people started putting ads in for-pay apps (because of Apple's earlier limited ways for developers to earn money from existing users for future app versions), they faced a user revolt, and some never recovered even after they removed the ads.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    112. Re:No ads please by medcalf · · Score: 1

      Any particular reason that you want to call a significant fraction of the American public cocksuckers? Oh, never mind, I just answered my own question.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    113. Re:No ads please by gullevek · · Score: 1

      This is not a Flamebait. Just tells the truth.

      --
      "Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
    114. Re:No ads please by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      If Apple decided to lock down, who's to say Adobe wouldn't just go with the flow and distribute Photoshop that way too?

      It depends on the terms, I doubt Adobe would want to give Apple a 30% cut.

    115. Re:No ads please by Stile+65 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe you typed "Fnord" instead? :)

      --
      I claim first use of "Error No. 0B" - or "No. 0B error." It'll be the new ID 10T!
    116. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      So because many people will go along with something and will not oppose it on principle, and therefore precedent for it exists, that automatically means it's not exploitative and is not an instance of double-dipping?

      You feel exploited by a company having more than one revenue stream. Fine, there is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is extrapolating your feelings to everyone else. This principle of yours is yours... not mine. Do not assume it applies to everyone else who goes along with something. Maybe they go along with it because it does not violate any principle of theirs -- in my case, if I feel I'm getting fair value out of the deal, I don't feel exploited.

      You seem to so badly need to make this a matter of taste or preference. No. I oppose this not because I find it distasteful, or like something better. I'm sorry you automatically assume everything is that shallow. I oppose it because I believe it's wrong.

      And I do not believe it is wrong. And yet you feel that it is everyone's responsibility to stand up for your (misguided, IMO) principles. It is a matter of taste and preference, insofar as taste and preference include our values of what is right and wrong in an economic transaction. Because consumer-level economic transactions are all about taste and preference.

      What have I limited? Back this up, please. I have not been calling for the government to use force to stop them. I have not in any way tried to prevent anyone from doing what they like. What I have done is explain that I won't be going along with this, and that I did not arrive at that decision by flipping a coin. It's the case for several good reasons.

      You have not limited anything. But what you believe to be the correct solution (black/white -- only one revenue source for content/app providers) would limit my options as a consumer of technology. Basically, you have an objection to a problem that I don't believe exists, and I'll explain why below.

      Your need to trivialize this by making it a matter of taste or preference, ignoring my principled objection, and acting like I am somehow limiting anyone by speaking my mind weakens your argument more than I likely could.Please, do not put thoughts in my mind or words in my mouth. I stated my positions in response to yours, no need to start assuming things about me that were not written, said, or thought by me. You speaking your mind, I have no objection to -- what I do have objection to is the results of how you think content/app revenue should work. This is not about you... it is about your specific position on this issue, which necessarily involves your value system and your opinions, which I needed to address if I'm going to explain why I disagree with you. Please do not take it as a personal attack, it is no such thing.

      Let me sum up my point very clearly so we don't get bogged down in more unfounded claims (my "need", etc).

      The decision to enter an economic transaction is simple -- is what I get out of the deal worth the same or more than what I put into it? How we value what we put into it and what we get out of it may vary. For example, you place a high value on things that you feel are exploitative, and you have a different set of behaviors that you consider exploitative than I do. There is not anything wrong with that.

      Elaborating of the exploitation issue -- this is the thing that I do think is misguided about your position: that a company that has more than one revenue stream is somehow exploitative because of "double-dipping", which makes their business model morally incorrect. You still have the choice of accepting or refusing their terms for the good or service provided. As long as you have that choice, and have the information needed to make that choice, they have done nothing wrong or exploitative. There is no reason they should limit their offerings to [pay + ad-free] or [f

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    117. Re:No ads please by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      But I deserve free apps with no ads! I'm not sure why I deserve it, or how I can force people to provide what I desire, but I'm gonna whine while I'm not getting my way.

      yeahn cause like, if your app is successful, theres just like 95% of the users who want it without ads, and 5% which are the dev themselves who want adverts.
      Heck, go ahead and tell me you're not using adblock or a similar tool on the web either maybe? Cause yeh they need the money to run all those servers too, you didn't know?

    118. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1
      You also stated:

      That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying. That's why personal preferences towards advertising are completely irrelevant.

      You are assigning a moral absolutism to your personal feelings about it. Somehow your feelings about what is acceptable to you trump everyone else's opinion of what is acceptable? And that anyone who acts in conflict with your own personal opinion is a fool?

      This is why I have an issue with not only your position, but also the assumption from which you argue it. Your personal value system does not apply to everyone else.

      Sure, you never abridge free will by preventing people from acting... but you pass a value judgment on them for doing so. It's not surprising that people might take offense to it.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    119. Re:No ads please by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      You've got to be kidding, right? Go to Dell.com and see how many different computers you can buy for less than it costs to buy a Macbook Pro, then come back and lecture us again about variety. Then, if you're still not convinced at the limited selection of Apple, check out Lenovo's site, HP's site, Asus' site, Acer's site, etc...

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    120. Re:No ads please by hitmark · · Score: 1

      what worries me is that if apple have a big enough sucess doing that, others will follow.

      btw, with the ipad i a keyboard dock, they have a low end imac with iphoneos. all they need to do is stagnate the imac hardware and slowly fade out support in osx updates.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    121. Re:No ads please by hitmark · · Score: 1

      iirc, iphoneos is osx without shell, root and with a different ui. So far the lockdown have worked well enough.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    122. Re:No ads please by hitmark · · Score: 1

      oh, they will probably leave the mac(book) pro around. The question is thhe non-pro products.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    123. Re:No ads please by hitmark · · Score: 1

      macbook air, first response to netbooks. ipad, second response...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    124. Re:No ads please by DeathElk · · Score: 1

      'Cause Slashcode supports Holdens! Go Lowndsey! (Ducks)

    125. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so in your small view of the world people who don't like apple must be either slashdot trolls or slashdot haters?

    126. Re:No ads please by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Only his credibility with residents of the Monastery. The rest of us figure it out without having to secretly scream 'Infidel' inside our heads.

      But I do realize this is apple.slashdot.org and not the real slashdot....

    127. Re:No ads please by quadelirus · · Score: 1

      You slashdotters out there: did you first get into computing and technology in order to consume more advertising and to have someone else tell you which software to run? Or did you turn to technology and computing in rejection of advertising and lockdowns (aka "command and control")? When you first got into computing and technology did you learn more from the gear that you had to fiddle with or the gear that "just worked"?

      Um, neither. I got into technology because it is cool, and I thought I could improve it, not because I liked or disliked advertising. In fact, advertising wasn't remotely on my mind. Did you really get into technology because you don't like advertising?

    128. Re:No ads please by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Isn't an iPhone part of the Uniform?

      disclaimer: I own an iPod Touch (3g) now. But my newest Mac is a G3. (I'd love to get the iPhone OS toolchain. Can it be installed on a Hacintosh, or does the big hammer come down if they catch you doing that?)

    129. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And a totally different market. Many people who run OS X on a Mac will not put up with losing root/shell access. Just like Tivo and Android are Linux sans root/shell -- but no-one's successfully doing distros like that for full feature PCs 'cause there is no market for that. Duh.

    130. Re:No ads please by Draek · · Score: 1

      Or that the inclusion of DRM in eBooks would lead to censorship and arbitrary deletions of content you had lawfully purchased.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    131. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      O Rly? Been living in a cave, have you?

    132. Re:No ads please by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      What happened to /. ? I started reading around the 200K user ID mark (didn't register for another 600K) and somewhere around 1M it went to trolling hell. It used to be just GNAA trolling and abuse trolls. Now it's flavour-of-the-month trolling. This month, it's cool to hate Apple. You'll get easy mod points. Last month it was Microsoft. Next month... maybe back to Microsoft, or keep flaming Apple? So many choices, so few intelligent comments.

      It has always been acceptable on Slashdot to hate Apple.

      Richard Stallman used to (still does) have an anti-Macintosh page on his site. Apple targeted the Mac from the get-go as the 'anti-hacker' (in the classic sense of the word) machine.

      Apple Computer only gained a partial reprieve from the scorn of the nerds/geeks when the company finally acknowledged they couldn't write a real multi-tasking OS and scrapped the effort, allowing NeXT to take over Apple instead.

      There didn't used to be an apple.slashdot.org domain.

      And hating Apple isn't a 'fad' that comes and goes. Some of us were listening live to Steve Jobs at the launch of Macintosh, and have never given in an inch to the dude since.

    133. Re:No ads please by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I meant that to read:

      Richard Stallman used to (still does?)

      I wouldn't pretend to represent RMS's opinions here.
       

    134. Re:No ads please by pureevilmatt · · Score: 1

      bluetooth mice and keyboards work on my jailbroken iphone. complete with on screen mouse cursor. http://iphonehelp.in/2010/01/06/btstack-mouse-lets-you-to-control-iphoneitouch-with-bluetooth-mouse/

    135. Re:No ads please by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      However, when you are paying for a phone, phone service, and the application, and still see ads, this is no longer justifiable. It's a form of double-dipping.

      Why? You're paying a certain price for an application, part of which is in cash, and part is in ad views. You know about both parts in advance, before you buy. Where is the "double-dipping" in that?

      Anyway, all that said... a similar service has been available on Android for ages. In practice, the way it is mostly used is this: applications have a "full" version, which costs $$$ and is ad-free, and a "lite" version, which is free, often has less features, and is ad-supported. Any paid application with ads is readily downvoted by the users.

    136. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Right, Burger King offers unlimited ways to make your burger, it doesn't mean that McDonalds, who use a set menu, don't have variety.

      By definition, Apple don't sell just one product that is the same. That is the the literal definition of a variety of products. Just because they don't have as many as Dell or Lenovo doesn't invalidate that.

    137. Re:No ads please by Raffaello · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's not that you deserve to take whatever you want from your neighbor's house, but society deserves to, because the marginal cost of a copy of the key to your neighbor's house is basically zero. Charging money for sleeping in your neighbor's spare bedroom is a sign that there's an economic inefficiency somewhere and that society could be better off, theoretically somehow.

      ;^)

    138. Re:No ads please by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      Android already does this, and has done it for a long time. There are free apps, paid apps, and apps that are ad supported in which the developer gets a cut of the revenue.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    139. Re:No ads please by drtsystems · · Score: 1

      The thing is I want my computer to be open but don't really care about my phone. My computer is a development machine and I am a power user and programmer. But my phone I want to be simple and intuitive so I can instantly do what I want to do with it.

      The iPad is the "locked down Mac" that people here are threatening is to come. I see there being dual product lines, the MacBook Pro's, (maybe iMacs and Macbooks), and Mac Pro's. Then there being iPad-like devices, maybe even coming in a laptop-with-touchscreen form of some sort which run an advanced version of iPhone OS. Give this touchscreen clamshell MacBook/iPad hybrid a faster version of the A4 ARM processor in the iPad and it could easily have 15+ hours of battery life in a form factor the size of the MacBook air. I see this being the second product line available IN ADDITION to the MacBook Pro's.

      As someone else said both newbies and power users use OS X. I see Apple differentiating their lines and keeping OS X for their power users/content creators and introducing an iPad-like line of computers for the newbie croud. (lets face it, if Apple made a cheap 3g MacBook Air form factor device running a souped up iPhone OS (adding say printing capabilities, etc.), there are soo many people I could recommend this to (my mom, grandma, etc.)

    140. Re:No ads please by Americano · · Score: 1

      The objection is that the moment you see a single ad you did not wish to see, you have lost control over the device. That's completely unacceptable when you are already paying. That's why personal preferences towards advertising are completely irrelevant.

      If you do not wish to see ads, do not install applications which are supported by ads.

      For something like broadcast TV or broadcast radio, that's acceptable, since it costs money to produce those things and you are viewing ads instead of paying a bill. You are obtaining something of value to offset the cost of watching ads. That makes it a fair exchange. However, when you are paying for a phone, phone service, and the application, and still see ads, this is no longer justifiable. It's a form of double-dipping. Thus, it's an adversarial way of relating to your customers because it amounts to taking advantage of them.

      This position is predicated on the assumption that what you pay for your phone service, phone, and the applications represents the "actual value" of what you are receiving. A simple look at the cost of an "unlocked" versus a "contract-subsidized" phone or other mobile device will show you that this is not, generally, the case. Another great example is newspapers and magazines: both full of ads, and both cost a few bucks still. Why? Because publication and creating the content costs more money than your $2-5 purchase fee would cover. So the company sells ad space in their publication, which helps lower the cost to the consumer. I expect this is the same model you'll see with the app store: free / ad-supported, expensive / no-ad, and "couple bucks" / "some ads" versions. I don't see any problem with this model, and I suspect many other people will not see a problem with it either. If somebody writes an application, wants to charge $30 for it, and then also wants to embed ads, I expect most people will balk at that, and the application will suffer as a result.

      Please read this quote from the summary and tell me whether you believe Apple is going to restrict these ad functions to free apps only (emphasis mine):

      Well, if CWmike says they're going to abuse their customers, then by golly, I guess it's a lock. I don't think Apple should have any restrictions or requirements for using the ad functions, personally. As someone who is working on a couple probably-very-small iPad / iPhone apps with a friend, I would absolutely consider whether the ads might be a helpful revenue stream to help us lower the cost of our app to people who might be interested, or at least cover the costs of the SDK & iPad we bought to test with. I hope Apple leaves that option available to us, and I think they probably will. You seem to think that Apple leaving the option on the table means that somehow, people will have *less* choice, and frankly I just don't see how having another option available equates to more limitation.

    141. Re:No ads please by sl149q · · Score: 1

      And a whole bunch of engineers at Microsoft have iPhones so they can check out the competition :-)

    142. Re:No ads please by Americano · · Score: 1

      If you're going to choose between two apps for the same task, many people will choose the free-as-in-beer app supported by ads instead of shelling out $5-$20 for the non-ad-supported app.

      Like Google's Gmail is hugely popular, and ad-supported. The same Google that supports Android. The same Google who gets most of its revenues from advertising online.

    143. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I completely agree with users not wanting these ads, especially the "fantastic, engaging, fantastic, interactive, terrifically fantastic animations!" (read: invasive) ads that Jobs apparently has in mind. What a grand ego trip he seems to be on. He can demand a 40% ransom for "delivering" captive, locked-in users to advertisers. I do not recall these users being "asked" if they wanted to be "delivered" or exposed to trashy animated advertisements. But of course, Jobs seems to think that his "customers" are there to serve him...it certainly cannot be the other way around!

      Hopefully things will soon reach a breaking point, and Apple customers (and people in general) will start to discover they do not like to be treated like mindless wallets with pieces of meat attached to them. Advertising exposure is not "just an annoyance" either. Companies invest huge $$$$ in it because it works. One in 300 people in the USA are bankrupt, perhaps ask someone in this situation what they think about the effects of "benevolent" advertising.

      I cannot believe how many posters in this thread are defending Apple. I thought SlashDot was the one place I could come where this kind of monetization of humanity would be rejected by most. But then, Apple apparently has paid "thought police" responding to forum postings (shhhh....one is going to reply to this posting in a few minutes, just watch...).

    144. Re:No ads please by Americano · · Score: 1

      No, Steve Jobs said that the average iPhone user uses their phone for 30 minutes a day, and if they showed one ad every 3 minutes, each user would see 10 ads during that time. Multiply that by the number of iPhones out there, and you have 1 billion impressions per day.

      He didn't say "We're gonna force them to using special clamps and eye glue." If you don't install & use ad-supported software, you won't get ads. Ads are implemented in each application, not at the iPhone OS level.

    145. Re:No ads please by node+3 · · Score: 1

      You can do the same thing (only different) in the iPhone simulator. The point is that you can't properly control an iPhone OS device with a mouse, but only simulate a subset of the device's interaction techniques, because the mouse is an inherently different input method. This is also why a Mac OS X tablet, which so many people seem to think they want, would have been a failure (just as so many tablet PCs have been).

    146. Re:No ads please by exomondo · · Score: 1

      just because you disagree and resort to childish name-calling doesn't make him wrong.

    147. Re:No ads please by Grant_Watson · · Score: 1

      It depends on the terms, I doubt Adobe would want to give Apple a 30% cut.

      What do retailers make on it now?

    148. Re:No ads please by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Apple, on the other hand, has never resorted to such tactics.

      Say what ? Does "Upgrade to Quicktime Pro" mean anything to you ?

    149. Re:No ads please by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      The answer to that is money. Port iPhone OS to x86 and put it on the iMacs. Release Garage Band, that stupid webcam app, and the iSuite for that platform and the majority of Apple's target market is happy. As a huge plus to Apple they are also now locked in to the app store ensuring Apple always get their cut.

      I am not sure if Apple would have the balls to do this but I can almost guarantee it has at least come across people's mind at Apple. Their focus hasn't exactly been on OSX lately as they can get better profits elsewhere. I would not be surprised to see them start phasing it out.

    150. Re:No ads please by Lars+T. · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      One doesn't have to be a fan-boi to be an Apple Hater.

      But being a moron helps.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    151. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>OSX 11

      Operating System Ten Eleven? :P

    152. Re:No ads please by Serious+Callers+Only · · Score: 1

      That makes it a fair exchange. However, when you are paying for a phone, phone service, and the application, and still see ads

      There is no suggestion of this or encouragement of this from Apple in the iAd announcement. What we do have is many free apps which include ads as a way to support development, and Apple wants some of that money. No big deal. No change for users, it just means Apple is running the ads service. Look for them to abuse their power as platform vendor to start squeezing out other options for displaying ads though.

      The only time this would be acceptable would be for free apps that would otherwise cost money.

      That's exactly where ads are used just now. If you buy an app and are shown ads, I'd suggest you complain vociferously, write a review and switch to a competing app - I know I would. The marketplace will sort this out *if your hypothetical situation arises*, and all this SDK adds is an easy way of adding ads to your app. If Apple start actually showing ads to users in other places (the phone app, etc), just get another phone (Android is definitely catching up).

      I'd be far more worried about the control-freakery shown over the use of things like .NET or Flash to develop for the phone, and app submissions in general. Apple really need to let go on that side of things and accept that not everyone wants to use their tools all the time. That's going to hurt the platform and increase the perception of it as a walled garden with walls which move arbitrarily amongst devs.

      I don't particularly want flash games on my phone, but some people do, and worse than that, perfectly legitimate systems like scripting in games and emulators will be completely crippled by this. It's a really bad move by Apple.

    153. Re:No ads please by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about the size of the hard drives, or the amount of memory available here. Look at the number of different models available, and if you can't see that Dell has more variety, then you are truly the gaylordest of the fanboys.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    154. Re:No ads please by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      The facts are that Apple started rejecting apps that used location in mobile ads for "user experience reasons". Now iAd is announced and one of the key features is that ads can use your location.

      This is not to mention the fact that implementing other iAd features is impossible for other ad networks because apps aren't allowed to download and run arbitrary code.

      Jobs has done it again - there will be a small amount of token competition to ward off regulators, but that competition will be forbidden by the app store rules from actually being able to match the iAd features.

    155. Re:No ads please by indiechild · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If some developer starts putting ads into paid apps, then vote with your feet and don't buy these apps. Better yet, don't buy an iPhone/iPod.

      It's fucking called freedom of choice.

    156. Re:No ads please by indiechild · · Score: 1

      It's the usual extremist "freedom-loving" zealot types trying to force their way of thinking on to everybody else. Shades of gray don't seem to exist for some people.

    157. Re:No ads please by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      If you don't want apps with ads, don't download them. As with computer software, it is likely that many apps will be available in free versions without ads and also in paid, add-free versions.

      But as an iPhone user you don't have a choice, you have to buy each and every one of the 20 odd apps available on the iStore (as well as every product advertised, of course), less the Apple black-ops commandos come to your home in their choppers and force you at gunpoint. Didn't you get the memo?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    158. Re:No ads please by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Read my post again. I am not disputing that Dell has more variety; that is a clear no brainer.

      My point is that even though Dell has more variety, doesn't mean that Apple doesn't have any. The two do not correlate. Your original assertion was that because Apple has no sub-$1k gaming laptop that they had no variety. Well, you actually said "little actual variety" (direct quote), despite having demonstrably different product lines that are physically different from one another in pretty marked ways - some are laptops, one is the size of a few CDS, one is designed to be expandable, the other has a screen built in but is a desktop. They also sell phones and music players.

      The fundamental raw product lines are reasonably similar to Dell - Inspiron/Latitude in laptops for example, with a large array of configurations of those base products (far more than with the MacBook and MacBook Pro configs, but still based on a small subset of designs).

      As to whether "gaylordest" is a word, however, is perhaps a discussion for another time. Maybe it's a word in high school.

      Again, since your level of discourse appears to only go so high that "gaylordest" is actually a word in your vocabulary, I will repeat that I am not saying that Apple has more variety than Dell, nor did I ever state or imply that in earlier posts.

    159. Re:No ads please by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Does apple even care about personal computers any more? The last noteworthy computer they announced was the Air (which in retrospect seems like a super-advanced iPad that was largely ignored).

      And when was the last noteworthy computer that any other company introduced?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    160. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I stopped reading at "MAC".

    161. Re:No ads please by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      Does apple even care about personal computers any more?

      Yes - its just that the flavour of the month is the iPad. The rumour sites are saying that they'll be updating their PC range Real Soon Now.

      The last noteworthy computer they announced was the Air (which in retrospect seems like a super-advanced iPad that was largely ignored).

      Nope - The Air was pretty obviously designed to compete with premium-priced ultraportables such as the Sony Vaios. Apple just had bad luck that the netbook phenomenon happened around the time the Air was ready for launch - so instead of reviews of the Air vs. a $2000 Vaio, we saw reviews of the Air vs. a $200 EEE.

      The unibody MacBooks were pretty noteworthy in terms of design, if not tech (apart from the Coca Cola years, design has always been an important factor for Apple). Its also noteworthy how many laptop makers have copied Apple's "scrabble tile" keyboards (which, surprisingly, are actually rather nice to use).

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    162. Re:No ads please by ciderVisor · · Score: 1

      It's iPhone 4.0 today and OSX 11 tomorrow.

      OSXI, surely ?

      --
      Squirrel!
    163. Re:No ads please by hitmark · · Score: 1

      jailbreak != out of box.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    164. Re:No ads please by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      Mac's are the only systems that readily run windows , OSX and Linux.
      Each OS family has its strengths and weaknesses. Windows will give you the better choice of games OSX the simplicity and security and Linux everything else thats worth doing.

      For some reason windows laptops seem prone to failure within a year or 3. The Apple systems appear to have decent build quality.

      Price seems to be the main barrier to mac adoption. Currently I take windows boxes and put Linux on them. There is no good reason other than price and availability that I don't do this with macs as well.

    165. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android already has adversiting apis, and many freebie android applications use adversiting. Old stuff.

    166. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are no excuses involved, since there is nothing to excuse.

      So you actually LIKE to pay for the ability to view ads?

      I think I speak for most people here, when I say that WE want to BE paid for viewing ads.

    167. Re:No ads please by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 1

      no - not 'a unified ad service for smaller developers who don't have the resources to roll their own'

      it is already a matter of about two hours to sign up, download and integrate the sdk from admob or a few other folks.

      any small developer can serve ads and generate revenue.

      This is Apple's ballsy grab of the mobile advertising market.
      They get to pre-integrate the sdk, and make their sdk more compelling than the competition.

      They have significant advantages over the competition. Admob, mobclix, and the others just got screwed.

      Google just spent $750million on Admob. I'm sure Apple is loving the fact that they just reduced the value of that investment by hundreds of millions.

    168. Re:No ads please by cthellis · · Score: 1

      Using "dude" in that way has been gender-neutralized since the 90's. I believe Bill and Ted sucked all the life out of it.

    169. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Final Cut Studio is a great example of how the two markets are different. The iGadgets are for the consumption of media content. Macintoshes are for the creation of media. What could possibly be gained by locking down the latter like is done on the former?

      They gain to lock-in the producers to their crap instead of losing them to competitors product for creating content.

    170. Re:No ads please by cthellis · · Score: 0, Redundant

      No, he's right! MACs do tend to be used by the two extremes of the user community! The newbies don't even know what Media Access Controls are, and life their lives blissfully unaware. The power-users are involved in MAC spoofing, and all sorts of other MAC-related activity, to haxx0r your boxx0r!

      You see? It all makes sense!

    171. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you trust apple blindly to always be good, if you're wrong then you're screwed. I'm not getting onto that bandwagon that's crashing into a wall IMO.
      Never give too much power, never. Republic/democracy works nowadays by letting at all time the guys in power to be put out of power. They have to fear us, not the other way around. Never, ever, let them control even the way you consume media/create media/browse the web. that might look benign, but maybe it's not.
      And don't be blind, an app-locked macbook/imac is not that far away and probably considered by apple. They'll call it a reponse to the nettops, be sure of that. Simple law of the market, if something can make them make more money, they'll do it. Even nowadays, some people bought an ipad and wont use their home computer so much (remember the iphone that makes people forgetting their laptop)

    172. Re:No ads please by Wingsy · · Score: 1

      From what I saw of the demo, if you don't want to watch the ad, don't tap the icon.

      --
      If I didn't have absolutely NOTHING to do, I wouldn't be here.
    173. Re:No ads please by assaultriflesforfree · · Score: 1

      The whole thing is so that if you want to include ads, they have some hooks on the SDK so that it's easy for the developer.

      The whole thing is so that if you want to include ads, Apple gets 40% of your revenue. They wrap this up in marketing so it looks like it's great for developers. The only real feature is that now the user can view ads and come right back to where they were in the app! Great! And in exchange for giving the iPhone this minimal level of reasonable functionality, 40% of all of your revenue. The Apple-provided hosting is not a feature, but an enforcement mechanism.

    174. Re:No ads please by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He said future. There is nothing in his post that is misinformed.

      Yes, you're quite right that OS X Apple PCs are a world of difference from the Iphones and Ipads. But at the same time, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if Apple drop OS X for Iphone OS in future. You said it yourself:

      Many iPad or iPhone users are looking forward to the day they can replace their computer with an iPpliance

      And so Apple may decide to cater for them - and why bother with the hassle of trying to maintain two operating systems? Apple has no allegience to any particular technology - they've a long history of dropping things (PowerPC, the first "MacOS") when it no longer suited them, even when for years they seemed core to their business and something they'd spent large amounts of effort trying to promote.

    175. Re:No ads please by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Sure, but what proportion of of OS X users does that make up?

      Even here on Slashdot, supposedly a geek place, look how much love there is for the Ipad and Iphone - far more than in the mainstream, in fact, so I'm not sure it's true (sadly) that most geeks who like Apple products do so for its openness.

    176. Re:No ads please by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      This is Apple. You're forgetting the possibility that they might well go "Who needs a mouse?" It doesn't matter whether it's a good idea or not - Apple could ship a Mac using touch and without a mouse, and the media (and all the Apple fans here) will be going on and on about how revolutionary it is, and yet another Apple first.

      Alternatively they could simply add mouse support. They may finally manage to add multitasking support, only years after everyone else, so who knows what they are capable of now.

    177. Re:No ads please by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      The first netbooks would be the obvious example (Asus Eee PC).

      There's also the point that Apple are held to a higher standard - the media give them overwhelming amounts of coverage even for non-noteworthy products (oh, yet another tablet - and just look at this non-story, about news of a mere future possibility of a phone update), so the fact that the Air - at first hyped for being revolutionary - ended up being ignored, is rather telling.

    178. Re:No ads please by dangitman · · Score: 1

      The first netbooks would be the obvious example (Asus Eee PC).

      So, given that netbooks pre-date the Macbook Air, then I guess the conclusion is that the industry is about to give up on computers and stop making them? That's the logic of the post I was replying to. Of course, it makes no sense.

      so the fact that the Air - at first hyped for being revolutionary - ended up being ignored, is rather telling.

      What is it telling? I don't remember much media hype about the Macbook Air. I also don't understand why media hype should affect an objective analysis of Apple or the rest of the industry.

      Shouldn't you be upset at the media for the hype? I mean, did you give Apple extra sympathy when the media was totally trash-talking the company?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    179. Re:No ads please by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      It's not about "tinkering", it's simple consumer choice. I like my 5800's browser, but I like that I also could have the choice to download Opera Mobile. And when Firefox for mobiles is released, I'll try that too.

      The success of Firefox shows that it's not just "tinkerers" and geeks who want the choice to try a different browser, but ordinary people too. And these people are buying phones that allow them to do that. They don't want to be told "Sorry, you can't install our application, because Apple doesn't allow you to".

    180. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do people seem to need to justify their opinion? People have different opinions, and it doesn't mean you, or they, are wrong... If you get this, stop trying to justify your position-just accept that people can disagree...

    181. Re:No ads please by hmar · · Score: 1

      Being an American based sight, Slashdot is now required to remove the names of any automobile manufacturer that is not General Motors, in an attempt to help GM finish paying off their debt to us. You will find that you can't type , , , or either.

    182. Re:No ads please by hmar · · Score: 1

      Yeah because running around posting about how much you hate a company is soOOOoo much cooler than being a fanboy. Bet you're fun on a date!

      How would anyone ever find out?

    183. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So when presented with the same choice, you and I may choose differently. The market sorts out what business model is successful, not your personal value system.

      Excuse me, but I don't value your personal value system of believing in a free market.
      I could understand you might want to think ".. that's cute, but you're wrong, my personal value system is correct".
      Which is nice. And the same remark the GP made, to which you addressed this comment.

      tl;dr: shouting "you're wrong and I am right" does not make you right.

      On another note:
      Successful business model need not imply customers are the best off.
      (actually, the worse off they are (while maintaining sales), the higher the profit can become).
      But that's just an objection to your personal value system.

    184. Re:No ads please by arisvega · · Score: 1

      If it's successful expect Android to follow suit.

      You mean lawsuit?

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
    185. Re:No ads please by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Eh? Modded down for quoting the rest of the referenced post for context?

      Does Anonymous Coward have sockpuppets now?

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    186. Re:No ads please by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      It's unlikely they'd do that. For instance, this would immediately make Macs unsuitable for universities and similar institutes - while a university may be able to afford a Mac lab with twenty iMacs, a Mac lab with twenty Mac Pros is decidedly less likely. Similarly MacBooks are much more popular with lecturers and students than MBPs and it's unlikely for that market to spontaneously switch to the more expensive model instead of just getting Lenovos.

      Also, locking down desktop OS X would be a PR nightmare which would cost Apple a lot of developer mindshare. They can get away with it on the iPhone because there never was a freely hackable iPhone (not to mention that smartphones aren't desktop computers) but on the PC market they'd just scare away the userbase they've built up over the last few years.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    187. Re:No ads please by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      HEY MODS!

      +5 Funny

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    188. Re:No ads please by Taevin · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? It has nothing to do with "infidels." I would cringe just as much if someone wrote LINUX or WINDOWS as if they're acronyms. Mac is not an acronym, at best it's an abbreviation for Macintosh but nowadays it's simply the product name. I also cringe when people write MicroSoft.

      When you can't correctly write the name of the product, you immediately paint yourself as someone who has no idea what you're talking about because no one on the inside of those communities writes it that way.

      Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to reading SlashDOT on my DELL WorkStation in my FOXFire browser.

    189. Re:No ads please by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      That's because your 'actual' objections are retarded.

      The ads are in the apps. The programmers of the apps put the ability for the ads to be shown into the apps.

      If you don't like it, don't use those apps. And STFU and build your own apps.

      In no way have you "lost control over your device". You just downloaded an app that had ads in it.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    190. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I call my buddy's hot wife dude.

      "Dude! you look HOT!" It pisses off my buddy, but hey.... he deserves it, he never tells his wife that she is hot.

    191. Re:No ads please by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Magic Mouse?

      Move the cursor to where you want to perform the action, perform the action on the multitouch surface of the Magic Mouse.

      For MacBooks, the same could be done with the integrated (multi)touchpad.

      I'm not a Mac user (I will be as soon as the machine my new employer is sending me arrives), but I do think outside the box.

      unrelated -- In a few days (or hours, you never know with UPS), I'll have Win, Lin, and OSX all working happily together. Why the fighting, guys? Why?

      Back on topic -- For the type of usage it's likely to see from me, I'd never want an iPad in its current implementation. This announcement is making me consider one for living room use by the end of the year.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    192. Re:No ads please by Taevin · · Score: 1

      The thing that some of us understand about devices like the iPhone and iPad is that they are not, not intended to be, nor ever will be general purpose computing devices. I'll even go so far as to say that I don't want my iPhone to be like that. Call it a toy all you want, but in a way that's exactly what I want. If I ever have to do more than tap a couple of times to do what I want on such a device, it's a failure. For me, all its value derives from the fact that I can get the information I need extremely quickly with an easy to use and pleasant UI.

      After my good experience with the iPhone I bought an iMac a few months ago to replace my aging desktop at home and I love that too. I'll tell you right now though that if they take away my ability to develop applications or really lock it down in anyway I'll kick it to the curb and go back to my Linux box (well ok, I'll just format it... no need to waste nice hardware :). Different contexts, different tolerances.

    193. Re:No ads please by T-Bone-T · · Score: 1

      Their selection may be limited compared to other companies and more expensive but they really do offer a variety of products. If you disagree, what do you mean by variety then?

    194. Re:No ads please by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1

      I even call my wife "dude". It has been gender neutral for a while now.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    195. Re:No ads please by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What was the last noteworthy computer Dell announced? Changes in OS don't count, since Apple has released new versions of its OS since the Air came out. Dell has come out with much better computers over time (my laptop is maybe two years old and I could already get a far better one for the money), and so has Apple.

      So, by the exact same logic you use to claim Apple may not care about personal computers, we can conclude that Dell may not care about personal computers.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    196. Re:No ads please by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      macbook air, first response to netbooks. ipad, second response...

      What Apple realized is that the netbook is kind of a half-assed solution to two different needs:

      1) People who need an ultralight computer to carry around with them. The Air fills this need with minimal compromise of function.

      2) People who need a low-priced portable device mainly for browsing the net, and watching/reading media. The iPad fills this function.

      I expect that Apple will continue both lines indefinitely, although as processors become more efficient and powerful, the line between the Air and the PowerBooks will probably blur.

    197. Re:No ads please by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      I oppose this not because I find it distasteful, or like something better. I'm sorry you automatically assume everything is that shallow. I oppose it because I believe it's wrong.

      Insisting something is "wrong" without providing any justification is just lazy--an excuse for not thinking.

    198. Re:No ads please by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I have my own method of not seeing ads on my iPhone. I don't get apps that have ads in them. (Or, if I do, it's because I've made a choice to do so, and recognize that the app maker has a revenue stream that doesn't involve money directly out of my wallet.)

      If Apple mandated that all apps show ads, or forced the iPhone to show ads, I think they'd lose customers faster than Tiger Woods lost endorsement contracts. People under contract would demand early termination, on the grounds that forced ads are a substantive change in service. That's why they aren't going to do that.

      Since Apple doesn't do that, any ads you encounter are your own choice. You don't need an ad blocker.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    199. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      So you actually LIKE to pay for the ability to view ads?

      That is not what I wrote, nor how I feel.

      Do yourself a favor and throw out your "jump to conclusions" mat.

      Menawhile my full explanation of how I feel about it is provided. If you don't want to read it, don't bother writing a response that asks a question already answered.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    200. Re:No ads please by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Apple could ship a Mac using touch and without a mouse, and the media (and all the Apple fans here) will be going on and on about how revolutionary it is, and yet another Apple first.

      You are aware that they already do? It's called the iPad. Sure, the iPad isn't designed to operate in the same market as their PC offerings but neither is their touch UI.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    201. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1
      Why do people seem to need to justify their opinion? People have different opinions, and it doesn't mean you, or they, are wrong... If you get this, stop trying to justify your position-just accept that people can disagree...

      I can respect others' opinions... I clearly stated that in my post... the issue is that his opinion passes a value judgment on my opinion that I believe to be invalid. He calls my position foolish, because he does not understand it. I do not wish him to think I am a fool; therefore I need to explain my position to him.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    202. Re:No ads please by sartin · · Score: 1

      There are II kinds of people in the world, those that understand Roman numerals...

      Yeah, but what are the other ten kinds of people?

    203. Re:No ads please by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but I don't value your personal value system of believing in a free market.

      That's not a personal value system. It's how things work. You are free to believe the sun orbits around the earth too, if you choose. You would just happen to be wrong in that case as well.

      tl;dr: shouting "you're wrong and I am right" does not make you right.

      If it was tl;dr -- then you have no basis claiming that my post was shouting "you're wrong and I'm right". Because most assuredly, that is not the case.

      Successful business model need not imply customers are the best off. (actually, the worse off they are (while maintaining sales), the higher the profit can become).

      What does that have to do with the price of tea in London? As long as there is competition, someone can offer a combination of better services and lower costs that are better for the customer.

      But that's just an objection to your personal value system.

      It's quite apparent that you do not understand what a value system is, since you keep misapplying the term. The economic system we operate under exists, and operates according to predictable rules on the micro level (which is what we're discussing). This is not a value system. It's just the way things are.

      The value system I refer to is the sum of the weight each person assigns to individual criteria when making economic decisions.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    204. Re:No ads please by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      The first netbooks would be the obvious example (Compaq LTE).

      FTFY

      Seriously, netbooks aren't some kind of brand new idea, they're just the ages-old concept of "let's make a really small notebook" with a fancy new name. Besides putting in better hardware and making them even smaller nothing much happened.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    205. Re:No ads please by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Or you have the choice of which to run. Or maybe a way to run iPhone OS has a shell over OS X.

      Back in OS9 days, they had a shell for schools and children that looked similar to iPhone OS, with just a bunch of icons to click to start apps. Everything was saved to a hidden folder that could only be accessed from within apps (much the way some Office users use the file dialog to move files around). There was also a key combo to get past this of course.

      Having an iPhone OS shell over a regular OS would be great for folks like my Mom. Course, in another couple versions, a tablet with keyboard may be all she needs anyways.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    206. Re:No ads please by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      This to Apple is a bad thing(TM). It destroys the homogeneity if they have to write "Does not work on Ipad/OSX" on the box, I mean that just doesn't work.

      Amazingly, most Windows games I know don't have "not compatible with Windows Mobile" on the box. Probably because no sane person would get the idea that regular PC software runs on a smartphone or PDA. Don't you think that Apple might get away with having their differently named OSes incompatible with each other?

      Yes, iPhone OS is a OS X derivative but it's not compatible, Apple doesn't pretend it is and they deliberately changed its name to indicate that it isn't.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    207. Re:No ads please by metamatic · · Score: 1

      People are laughing at me when I suggest that future iMacs will have app store lockdowns and now will be "ad-supported" to boot.

      No, it's my big fear too.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    208. Re:No ads please by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, if you use the Ad API, Apple provides the clients and takes 40% (or was it 30%?).

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    209. Re:No ads please by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      So... don't be an iPhone users? Isn't that a choice?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    210. Re:No ads please by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Having a choice of free app with advertising is not a choice the poster above wants users to have. Why are you trying to push choice on folks that other folks don't want them to have? Why do you hate A'merkins? ;-)

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    211. Re:No ads please by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Good thing iphones don't multi-task.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    212. Re:No ads please by metamatic · · Score: 1

      The Air was pretty obviously designed to compete with premium-priced ultraportables such as the Sony Vaios.

      Except it didn't, because it was as big as a full-size laptop; just thinner.

      It was basically a failure to understand what customers want. I say this because I've only ever seen one person using one.

      Everybody hoped the Apple tablet was going to be the small portable Mac everyone has been waiting for, that the Air failed to be. It wasn't, so we're all still waiting.

      Ultimately, the Air was a piece of fancy industrial design that was priced too high and involved too many compromises, without cutting the things that needed to be cut. Kinda like the G4 cube.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    213. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consistency hasn't exactly been Apple's strong point lately.

    214. Re:No ads please by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      Straw man.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    215. Re:No ads please by Americano · · Score: 1
      And if being able to install any application you choose from any source you choose is important to you, you will not buy an Apple iPhone.

      I don't see Apple claiming that they allow you to put "whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want, however you want," on the phone. They are very clear that the way to get apps is through the app store. So anybody who buys an iPhone and then complains about how its locked down nature prevents them from installing whatever they want is, to put it bluntly, retarded.

      By all means, state your objections to Apples' closed approach. By all means, refuse to spend your money on their products as a result. By all means, support (or START) a company which uses different approaches. But let's dispense with the fiction that people are being misled into thinking they have complete freedom to do whatever they want with their iPhone. We all get it. And lots of people are buying it still. The people who *care* about complete freedom are not buying iPhones. The rest of the people are simply looking for a solution that isn't half-baked and buggy.

      The success of Firefox shows that it's not just "tinkerers" and geeks who want the choice to try a different browser, but ordinary people too. And these people are buying phones that allow them to do that. They don't want to be told "Sorry, you can't install our application, because Apple doesn't allow you to".

      No, the success of Firefox shows that Mozilla offered a browser that had substantially better features than the steaming pile of shit that is/was IE6. "Ordinary people" use Firefox because it's free and it works well (most of the time). Tinkerers and geeks care about "the freedom to try other browsers." My parents and many of my friends began using Firefox because I browbeat them into it because I was getting sick of answering "How come my computer is so sluggish?" questions. They continue using Firefox because it's a functional solution which does what it's intended to.

    216. Re:No ads please by Altus · · Score: 1

      they could do that, but I bet that their margins on the iMac are considerably larger than their margins on the iPad. Whats in it for apple?

      Unless people stop buying the iMac in favor of a setup like you are describing (which I think is a decent low cost alternative for students or casual users) in which case, isnt it really the market that made the decision?

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    217. Re:No ads please by Altus · · Score: 1

      I am the only full time mac dev at my company. I am also just about the only dev who doesn't (yet) own an iPhone. There are even a few people who picked up iPads.

      iPhones are popular, they fill a need that existed in the market and only recently have real competitors started to emerge. The iPhone is popular among both the tech savy and the non savy. People here need to accept that.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    218. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, the guy who works for IBM is totally having nightmares about Apple's nefarious plot to destroy openness. What's the matter, just upset that you didn't think of it first?

    219. Re:No ads please by mqduck · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure your allusion to/parody of that famous quote about dissent against genocidal evil and the necessity of defending those who aren't ourselves breaks down somewhere around the "there was no one left to speak up" part. Unless the world started communicating exclusively via Google Voice and I failed to notice, that doesn't make a lot of sense.

      --
      Property is theft.
    220. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that Steve Jobs specifically said during the Q&A developers were free to use other ad services. But don't let facts get in the way of a good troll.

      Yes, hear hear. Chairman Jobs has never, ever gone back on something he said in a presentation.

    221. Re:No ads please by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Magic Mouse

      There is no mouse possible to fully utilize multitouch because multitouch means touching multiple parts of the screen at the same time. There are games where you move a virtual d-pad with one thumb and have a few buttons that you can press with the other thumb, at the same time.

      And multitouch is more than just two, it's all of your fingers. At the same time. Anywhere on the screen. The mouse cannot do that.

    222. Re:No ads please by node+3 · · Score: 1

      Just because you don't like me calling him out on his idiocy, does not make him right, either.

      He's wrong, wrong, wrong. And foolishly so. There's no way to mince words about it. To *not* call him an idiot is to give him too much credence. He's claiming vindication for his charge that Apple is going to lock down Mac OS X the same way the iPhone is locked down. THIS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

      And, apparently, you missed this gem from his post:

      I swear to you by all that is holy, by the time this is over, we're going to regret having been in such an all-consuming hurry to suck the iDick.

    223. Re:No ads please by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Oh no. A company might trend in an unfavorable direction!

      So what? Those of us using Macs because it's an awesome GUI on top of *nix will switch to Linux. Those of us who are using Macs because they are easy to use and hard to crash will continue to use them.

      Why are you worked up over this?

      (Yes, I'm laughing.)

    224. Re:No ads please by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      does apple get a cut of the ads revenue from the "approved" add service?

    225. Re:No ads please by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

      For one thing OS X is a *nix, with full shell/root access. Tricky to lock that down, not to mention all the people who use it because of that would quickly switch to Linux.

      Apple has full control over the hardware. Can you say TPM? Having full shell/root access doesn't do you any good if the program you are trying to run gets zapped at a lower level.

      With the kind of setup Apple has, I would believe that they could get it "locked down" quite well. No, not perfectly, but enough to make me want to switch to something else (i agree with that!).

      Regards.

    226. Re:No ads please by CdBee · · Score: 1

      Do you know how much work it would take to put mouse suport in iPhone OS? the answer is 'a trivial amount' given the relationship of iPhone OS to Mac OS and the software development resources Apple has to hand. even a jailbreaker can get a mouse pointer onto an iPhone...

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    227. Re:No ads please by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      And a desktop computer can't have a touch screen.

      Oh. Wait.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    228. Re:No ads please by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      I couldn't disagree more with you. What the gp says is most likely to happen. And, not just in the Apple arena. Your attack on his informative post seems more trollesque than anything he wrote.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    229. Re:No ads please by shiftless · · Score: 1

      When I first got into computing, I learned more from stuff I had to fiddle with. Now I'm older and I want stuff that just works. That's why after 10 years I switched from Linux to Windows 7, so that I could plug a monitor into my laptop and have it Just Work(TM) (instead of REQUIRING me to edit xorg.conf), or play a video or music and have it Just Work(TM) (instead of the sound system to just randomly decide to stop working), etc. I like computers, but I don't want or need my entire life to center around them. If my daily driver required me to be under the hood twice a week taking it apart and putting it back together to get it to work right, I'm pretty sure I'd get rid of that POS too.

    230. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like them or hate them, the more money Apple funnels towards the developers, the better software support it will have. If it's successful expect Android to follow suit.

      Umm, only if the evil overlords decide to approve your seemingly innocent app. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure there's plenty of support for ads on Android. You know, being as open as it is and all.

    231. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pity that got modded as flamebait, what with all the "You haveta have iTunes to install apps!" bullshit that keeps getting modded up here.

    232. Re:No ads please by tirerim · · Score: 1

      When I first got into computing, I never once thought about whether I would be seeing advertising in relation to it. It wasn't to consume more, nor was it to reject advertising elsewhere. The idea of worrying about how much advertising there would be in an entire area of technology never even occurred to me; what the technology did was vastly more important.

    233. Re:No ads please by net28573 · · Score: 1

      only because the prerequisitee for being a mac power user is lowered because the whole purpose for macs is something that just works then and there. whether or not its the right format or lets you customize it as much as windows commonly has allowed is another story. windows has made more power users out of people than most other os's and dont attack me linux, ubuntu, etc users because admit it, you used a windows computer first before you dove into another os.

      --
      RIP TRICERATOPS, YOU NEVER EXISTED
    234. Re:No ads please by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Any paid application with ads is readily downvoted by the users.

      And that will continue to be the case as long as there are alternatives. If - or when - the platform owner manages to impose double dipping (stop sniggering at the back) consumers will have the option to take it or leave it.

      They'll choose to take it (the next one to smirk gets detention). After six months they'll have forgotten they ever had the choice, the vacuous bunch of sheep that they are.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    235. Re:No ads please by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      What could possibly be gained by locking down the latter like is done on the former?

      A cut of the price of the software for Apple.

      ... Of Final Cut. Do you have any idea who makes Final Cut?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    236. Re:No ads please by node+3 · · Score: 1

      And a desktop computer can't have a touch screen.

      Oh. Wait.

      It's clear you think you've made a logical point here, but really, there isn't one.

      You have more fingers than mouse pointers, so you can more reasonably emulate a mouse with your finger (this is done indirectly with a trackpad). But you JUST CAN'T reasonably emulate 10 fingers with a single mouse, no matter what mouse you use.

    237. Re:No ads please by richtaur · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. As a developer, here are some of the things I cannot tolerate about iPhone/iPad/etc. as compared to my MacBook:

      - No root access.
      - Locked down "developer rights" (I have to pay Apple $100/year just to make apps for *my* own device).
      - App store only gallery for apps (I cannot put my app on my own website, for example).
      - Many others like limited APIs and restrictions on what I can use to develop apps.

      So other developers scoff at you and claim that if Apple starts implementing these types of things for Macbooks, that developers will switch over to Linux, no big deal. But keep this in mind: we developers are outnumbered by a vast amount. Web developers grudgingly have to support Internet Explorer because it's the most used browser, and likewise we'll have to support Mac if it becomes this huge monster like iPhone has, whether we want to or not. That makes getting away from Apple and Macs difficult.

    238. Re:No ads please by gehrehmee · · Score: 1

      The ipod touch and iphone run darwin, a *nix with full shell/root access... but locked down.

      --
      "You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help" -- Calvin
    239. Re:No ads please by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      apple is free to change the terms of service any time they want, expect them to do so.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    240. Re:No ads please by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      WTF does your reply have to do with the post you're replying to? I (albeit sarcastically) pointed out that a desktop computer can have a touchscreen and you're still on about the fucking mouse.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    241. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because they can take away the apps at any time. Haven't you read the license agreement for using the app store? They reserve the right to pull an Amazon-1984 move on "your" apps at any time. Why does anyone tolerate that?

      The "app store" model is really just a glorified rental station.

    242. Re:No ads please by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      For one thing OS X is a *nix, with full shell/root access. Tricky to lock that down, not to mention all the people who use it because of that would quickly switch to Linux.

      So are the iPhone, etc. The only difference is the ability to boot the hardware from a device which will install a different OS. Maybe future macintoshes won't let you do that.

    243. Re:No ads please by causality · · Score: 1

      You are assigning a moral absolutism to your personal feelings about it. Somehow your feelings about what is acceptable to you trump everyone else's opinion of what is acceptable? And that anyone who acts in conflict with your own personal opinion is a fool?

      The acceptance of something that is not really acceptable is what I mean by "foolish". I still want people to have the right to make those decisions, because I think micromanaging their decision-making is a "cure" that is far worse than the disease.

      Sure, you never abridge free will by preventing people from acting... but you pass a value judgment on them for doing so. It's not surprising that people might take offense to it.

      I frequently encounter this line of reasoning and believe it unnecessary. I can believe that an action is foolish without judging the worth of the person who takes it. That's easy for me; I too have done foolish things. But I overcame them by being honest about the fact that they were foolish and correcting my actions. I don't believe that work is ever going to be finished.

      Because of all of this, I'd have to negatively judge myself personally if I negatively judged them personally. It's interesting that no one complains about "value judgments" when I say that I have done foolish things. They only complain when I am as honest with others as I am with myself. It's clear to me this is about ego and not about any perceived double standard.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    244. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being on slashdot, your wife is likely to be a dude (i.e. male), but yeah, you have a point.

    245. Re:No ads please by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      When you first got into computing and technology did you learn more from the gear that you had to fiddle with or the gear that "just worked"?

      Funny story, I learned way more from the gear that "just worked", because I had to learn more about it to fiddle with it. It's a bit of a different ball game these days, but back then it was basically DOS vs. hex editors, INI files vs. ResEdit. I credit the Mac platform with bringing me much closer to the hardware much more quickly, if you can believe it.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    246. Re:No ads please by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      The remote control would be, you guessed-it, an "dumbed down" iPhone.

      More likely, it would just be an app for your iPhone or iPad. In fact, they already have this; I'm not sure why the AppleTV isn't more popular, but I get the feeling it has something to do with not offering any advantages over just using your exsiting Macbook Pro with the "Front Row" application and buying a much cheaper a Mini-DisplayPort -> HDMI adapter. Look for AppleTV to become more than a hard drive running a version of Front Row with the iTunes store built in.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    247. Re:No ads please by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      They just updated their entire notebook line today.

      Notebooks and desktops are a mature product. You can't have revolutionary new notebooks released every other year.

    248. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...only because the prerequisitee for being a mac power user is lowered...windows has made more power users out of people than most other os's...

      That's exactly backwards. It's windows that has the absurdly low bar for people calling themselves "power users', everyone who knows their way around MSword claims to be one -- and a lot of that is because windows ships with an utterly useless command line interpreter, vs OS X and every other *nix, which come with full-featured proper shells and extremely capable CLI tools.

      dont attack me linux, ubuntu, etc users because admit it, you used a windows computer first before you dove into another os.

      Nope. I started on a Mac in 1987. Once had to live with XP for three months in 2003, at which point I became extremely motivated to learn Linux. Windows is a total POS, the only people who don't agree are the inexperienced and people making money off winlusers.

    249. Re:No ads please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a *nix with full shell/root access... but locked down

      By definition if it's locked down there is no shell/root access. That's what jailbreaking is all about. Always amazes me how sooooo many people who obviously have zero experience with Apple devices (and no understanding of *nix) are so quick to throw in their $.02... Simply put, opinions formed in ignorance are about as common as bird shit -- and just as insignificant, too.

  2. it's android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so iphone 4.0 is android

  3. So no flash or java, but we get ads! by Kenja · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Good to know Apple has their priorities right.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by lolwhat · · Score: 5, Funny

      But they will use HTML5 for the ads! Progress! /s

    2. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a way for developers to put ads into their apps, the way many free apps do now. Apple just created a framework for how the ads get delivered and displayed as well as a way to recognize the revenue.

    3. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Good to know Apple has their priorities right.

      They do. Have you seen their profit margin? You do know they are a for-profit company, right?

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    4. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Yep Priority one make sure the developers can make money doing this.
      Priority two no outdated technology like Flash or Java

    5. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by CoffeeDog · · Score: 1

      Well when you consider how many ads on the web are flash, when they blocked this from their platform they had to do something to appease the media overloads for interactive and annoying ways to push products to the masses!

    6. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by mswhippingboy · · Score: 1

      Yep Priority one make sure the developers can make money doing this.

      Good luck with that.
      I think I'll use my time to develop for a platform that I don't have do ask iJobs for permission to sell.

      Priority two no outdated technology like Flash or Java

      Right. Only state-of-the-art early-80s Objective-C.

      --
      Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
    7. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by Draek · · Score: 1

      Calling Java an "outdated technology" is one of the best ways to proclaim your utter lack of experience in the IT field, after "Access is a great database" and "Internet Explorer is really secure".

      Please spend a couple months out there in the real world then come back before posting again, thanks.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    8. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      The world disagrees

      http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1600105/mind-language

      About the Java part that is, Access and IE are both horrible nightmares that should be burned from the earth.

    9. Re:So no flash or java, but we get ads! by virgilp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh yes, can't wait the moment when all the flash haters/html5 lovers will get to have obnoxious ads written in HTML5. And probably harder to block by something as simple as "click to flash". I see Steve is really pushing for that. Yay for standards-compliant advertising !

  4. Fantastic news by amliebsch · · Score: 5, Funny

    Every time I use an iPhone, I can't help thinking, "if only this had more *ads*." I mean, really, what good is a smart phone without pop-over advertisements?

    --
    If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    1. Re:Fantastic news by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Every time I use an iPhone, I can't help thinking, "if only this had more *ads*."

      Well, I don't use an iPhone, but if my i-neken had more ads, I, uh, well, I'd certainly have another one !

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    2. Re:Fantastic news by QuantumRiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't wait to see how many annoying (but non-flash) ads full of animation and video can do to get me right up to my 5GB data limit every month.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    3. Re:Fantastic news by eugene2k · · Score: 1

      Every time you use an iPhone a kitten dies.

      --
      Apple has "Mac vs PC", Microsoft has "Laptop Hunters", Linux has recession
    4. Re:Fantastic news by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't know if you've ever used any free Apps but most of them are ad-supported. Normally they use some sort of construct to show you an ad. Apple is making a framework for ads so developers no longer have to kluge them in.

      "Developers [who create free apps] need to find a way to start making their money," Jobs said. "A lot of developers turn to advertising - and we think these current advertisements really suck."

      During its presentation of the new ad network, chief executive Steve Jobs noted that when you click on existing iPhone mobile ads, it yanks you out of the application you're running and launches a web ad. This prevents people from clicking on ads more often.

      Also they are developing a ecosystem so that ad-content revenue is handled differently. Normally a developer would have to negotiate with the ad generator. Instead Apple can handle all that for you. App developers can still use the old system if they wish but it probably will not be as advanced.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:Fantastic news by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Obviously since you don't use an iPhone, you don't know that some if not most of the free apps are ad-supported. They use a variety of different techniques to show an ad. Some of which are cumbersome. Apple is just adding a framework to make things easier to code.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:Fantastic news by geekoid · · Score: 1

      true, but I don't use one anyways.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:Fantastic news by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone sell, or for that matter buy, a smartphone without "unlimited" internet usage?

      I use quotes because here in the UK mobile providers have "fair use" policies are somewhat coy about what that means. From what I understand you'd have to exceed about 40GiB/mo for a month or two to fall afoul though.

      --
      Nick
    8. Re:Fantastic news by Zadaz · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I can't wait to see how long it takes for an ad platform which is embedded at the operating system level and connected to a global distribution network that users have no control over to cause havoc on a enormous scale.

      I was ready to buy a new iPhone when the product refreshed this year, but now I'm looking at what else is out there.

    9. Re:Fantastic news by bonch · · Score: 4, Informative

      Okay, since Slashdotters are clearly going to be completely reactionary and assume this means ads are going to be popping-over all your apps (did you even watch the media event to see it in action?), let's get this out of the way:

      1.) This is for apps that are already ad-supported, like all those free and .99 versions that complement the more expensive, ad-free versions.
      2.) The point is so that every app developer doesn't have to roll their own ad systems like they do now.
      2.) The ads are just little HTML5 banners.

      That's all it is, Slashdot.

    10. Re:Fantastic news by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Every time you use an iPhone a kitten dies.

      That's only because every time I use an iPhone an Apple "Genius" masturbates.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    11. Re:Fantastic news by bonch · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you don't want to see the ads, don't buy ad-supported apps. There is almost always a more expensive ad-free version. iAd is just so every developer doesn't have to implement their own ad system every time.

      God, the uninformed, reactionary Apple-haters are out in full force today.

    12. Re:Fantastic news by geekoid · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Which doesn't address the poster point.
      how bandwidth intensive will the ads be allowed to be?

      My recommendation to everyone is not to use the ad support apps. In my experiences they end up being problematic.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:Fantastic news by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      5Gb can hold a lot of 30x320 banners. If you dont want video and animation don't click on them stupid.

    14. Re:Fantastic news by evil_aar0n · · Score: 1

      Are you implying that it's just today...? I thought it was _every_ day.

      --
      Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
    15. Re:Fantastic news by CoffeeDog · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      So making it easier for developers to put ads into their apps is going to make less apps with ads in them? Really? What Apple is doing is clear as day: Developer makes a paid ad-free app and Apple gets a cut of the sale. Developer also makes free ad-supported app and Apple gets nothing while a cut of the ad revenue is going to some other online ad company. Apple bakes their own system in the OS since they can stamp out the competition and drink the other ad company's milkshake. Underhanded capitalism wins.

    16. Re:Fantastic news by Ayanami_R · · Score: 1

      Because outside of Sprint 4G service (at least as far as I know) 5GB capped plans are all that there are in the US :(

      --
      "Science is the power of man"
    17. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple is getting worst than MS.. closed OS, closed Market, closed everything... remember their 1984 adv... well, they are they are the big brother now..
      i wouldnt buy a piece of garbage from them... prolly bc if i do i would have to ask them where can i throw it

    18. Re:Fantastic news by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      And those of us with a Tech IQ over 80 will simply jailbreak the phone and install iADblocker and enjoy zero ad's because apple just made a unified simple way for us to block all ad's.

      Thanks STEVE!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    19. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ads are just little HTML5 banners.

      Assuming I can't insert privoxy under my little app (on my little phone, so it's my app, not yours) and remove those little banners, this only goes to reaffirm why I continue to not need a smartphone. Though really, iAd should include an "I don't want ads" checkbox on the phone, and not require a filtering proxy. Now that would be a smart phone.

    20. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't being Apple-haters, they're being Ad/Marketing haters.

    21. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i love this new understanding of reactionary! so hip a defense!

      seriously though, i think these ads are just what the apple user should expect... they've proved they're susceptible to marketing - why shouldn't they find themselves on the receiving end of a constant stream of non-skippable and non-blockable little bundles of joy.

      just suck down that saccharin apple gloop now- and if you feel sick, then just think of the shiny plastic and how it will impress all your friends!!!!

      like a lot of people, i'm not sure the world wouldn't be a better place without apple and the assorted turds that worship them. this goes way beyond slashdot btw.

    22. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have bought a ham radio with that money hahaha

    23. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      God, I hate you. I am not sure why; I just do.

    24. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Little HTML I could take, but HTML5? Dear god! The adverts are going to be playing fullscreen video and quake while I'm trying to read my email.

    25. Re:Fantastic news by morty_vikka · · Score: 1

      Woah! Easy there tiger, do you expect us to read the entire summary??

      Give /.ers some credit, perhaps the title could have been a little more concise in anticipation of the usual knee-jerk comments.

    26. Re:Fantastic news by afidel · · Score: 1

      Nope, the iPhone data plans are the only non-capped plan out there AFAIK, even for corporate data plans. The announced enterprise features mean we will probably be getting some requests for iPhones for senior management before the end of the summer, previously we could easily deflect these by saying that they weren't secure or manageable. Now, there's little reason not to use them if the employee is comfortable doing text entry on the iPhone.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    27. Re:Fantastic news by punit_r · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone sell, or for that matter buy, a smartphone without "unlimited" internet usage?

      Because outside of Sprint 4G service (at least as far as I know) 5GB capped plans are all that there are in the US :(

      True. Here in India the two iPhone providers (Vodafone and Airtel) do not have any unlimited data plans for iPhone. The rates range from $0.001/10kB to $0.006/50kB with a fixed free usage allowance of a few hundred MBs in data plans.

      The only unlimited data plans that exist are for Blackberry phones. Another point to note here is, India does not have any 3G service provider except for the state run MTNL and BSNL. The bidding for 3G spectrum by private providers gets delayed by a few months every time due to "circumstances beyond the control" of the telecom ministry.

      PS: I checked the rates while converting from INR 5paise and 30paise respectively to USD. yes, I am aware of verizon math... $0.002 and 0.002c :)
      PPS: I was tempted to provide a comparison with Indian mobile data rates just because the call rates in Indian mobile market are one of the lowest in the world. i.e., free Incoming calls and SMS. Outgoing rates as low as 2.5c or $0.025 per minute or SMS (INR 1)

    28. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because unfortunately in North America most cellular providers don't have an unlimited plan, or if they do, its so overly expensive its not worth it. Plus, if you just got a GOOD smartphone, like a BlackBerry you would never have to worry about going over your 5GB limit unless you're streaming radio and watching youtube every waking hour....

    29. Re:Fantastic news by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone sell, or for that matter buy, a smartphone without "unlimited" internet usage?

      I use quotes because here in the UK mobile providers have "fair use" policies are somewhat coy about what that means. From what I understand you'd have to exceed about 40GiB/mo for a month or two to fall afoul though.

      Well aren't you lucky sods. I happen to live in a country where there is an illusion of competition more correctly referred to as all-out collusion and an entrenched market monopoly leader which has until now had little incentive to provide a service or invest in infrastructure. It sounds like the US, but no sir, it's Australia, and you'd struggle to find a provider that will willingly throw in more than a couple of gigs of data a month even on "unlimited" $99/mo plans. While the rest of the world enjoys call rates going down over time, recently the major telcos all hiked their rates ("independently" mind you) to 90c per minute with a 35c flagfall.

      Meanwhile my friend in India pays Rs. 0.01 per second. Sure, he has to pay for incoming call roaming outside his state, but 99% of his calls wouldn't even round up to an Australian cent.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    30. Re:Fantastic news by sqrt(2) · · Score: 1

      AT&T has an unlimited data plan for $30/month.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    31. Re:Fantastic news by wintermute000 · · Score: 1

      >

      God, the uninformed, reactionary Apple-haters are out in full force today.

      you must be new around here...

    32. Re:Fantastic news by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      That's all it is, Slashdot.

      You forgot one more thing:

      4.) Android has the same thing.
      5.) So far, it hasn't significantly inconvenienced anyone (I'm saying this as an Android user).

      Really, why all the rage about ads? If you hate them so much, just boycott the ad-supported ones.

      The new SDK restrictions are a far bigger deal than this.

    33. Re:Fantastic news by exomondo · · Score: 1

      for the love of god everyone buy iphones so Apple has a monopoly in the smartphone market and anti-trust suits can stamp out this stupid anti-competitive behavior!

    34. Re:Fantastic news by slack_prad · · Score: 1

      The 3 G spectrum bid starts today! People will start to see 3G offerings from private providers starting as soon as September!!!

      --
      Sent from my desktop computer
    35. Re:Fantastic news by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 1

      no - it's so developers don't have to implement one of the many competing simple ad systems out there.

      admob, mobclix, quattro, etc.

    36. Re:Fantastic news by rwjyoung · · Score: 1

      40GiB/mo ?? Please, where do you get that? Please, I want. My android has a 3GiB/mo fair use, not certain what happens if I exceed it but the phone is trying hard, so I will find out soon. Where can I get 40GiB/mo?

      --
      Watch me build my house
    37. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, the adds will be HTML5? Am I the only one who thinks this is a flanking move against Flash?

      Having to learn how to make anoying anmated eysores in HTML 5 instead of flash in order to advertize on the iPhone will be a crack in the Adobe fortress.

    38. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iAd itself is a good idea and will probably create more apps that won't cost $ in the short term, but long term, it will become a burden.

      I think you fail to see the long term effects this will have. Ad supported apps, while sound great on the surface, will end up being the huge % of apps will have ads just because they can, whether you pay for them or not.

    39. Re:Fantastic news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Steve Jobs, the uninformed, reactionary Apple-haters are out in full force today."

      Fixed that for ya.

    40. Re:Fantastic news by Deosyne · · Score: 1

      I've had very good experiences using ad-supported applications. Admittedly, they are on my Droid so they are limited to tiny Google Adwords (is that right?) boxes that I barely notice. The iAds will be different, but the ad-supported app model is not entirely unreasonable.

  5. Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read the article:

    Apple looked at thousands of apps to determine what services apps would most need to keep running while in the background. "In iPhone OS 4, we're providing those services as APIs to developers,"

    In other words, the iPhone still isn't capable of doing true multitasking, something that other smartphones - well, never lacked.

    Instead you're still stuck with only being able to do the things that Apple has decided to allow their sheep the ability to do on Apple's phone - not what the lowly sheep that bought it wishes they could do.

    1. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by MrCoke · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Not everybody wants a SSH console on their mobile phone.

    2. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by timmarhy · · Score: 2

      but some people do, and that's the point of wanting it. duh.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    3. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about IM?

    4. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LIAR!

    5. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True multi-tasking isn't coming to the iPhone. The multi-tasking will be limited. If it falls under 7 different categories it will be supported.

      Apple has always been against mult-tasking because they claim it hampers performance and drains the battery. As a Window Mobile user, I can't count the number of times my phone was freaking sluggish only to find that certain apps were running in the background that didn't kill themselves properly. With this Apple will allow certain types of behavior. Most of the multi-tasking that most consumers have wanted falls under one of these categories. Now if you're trying to sequence a genome while twittering your friends, that's probably not supported.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    6. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by pushing-robot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would have been pissed if they'd copied WinMo's or most other implementations. As it is, it's at about the edge of my tolerance level. I loved the old Palm PDAs, which had execute-in-place but no background tasks to bog the thing down. It was great knowing that when an app was closed it was using zero system resources without losing any unsaved work. Most devices I've used since then turn into a whack-a-mole of ending programs I'd forgotten about and processes that decided they just wanted to stick around and sightsee. Apple's solution tries to satisfy everyone, but I'm not getting my hopes up until I see how developers abuse it.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    7. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      With respect, they showed Skype running in the background and accepting calls; they didn't go into the specifics of how any of this was implemented or what the API "looks like," but it's clear that if you're an app developer, you at least have to ability to launch code that runs while other apps are running, are able to listen on ports and post UI notifications while other apps are running, and are able to change the window (like adding the "Skype" top windowframe) while other apps are running.

      The phone could always multitask, it was a question of wether or not 3rd parties would be permitted to.

      Maybe if you hate on the iPhone and its users enough, someone will finally love you.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    8. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by anarche · · Score: 1

      no, some people like to make phone calls to their friends

      --
      Wait! Whats a sig?
    9. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not everybody wants a SSH console on their mobile phone.

      .. and that's the only thing multi-tasking is useful for, right?

      Sorry, what was your point?

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    10. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by markdavis · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have, and it doesn't impress me. It is far from true multitasking. If you want to see "slick", you need to look at how Palm WebOS does it, and has been doing it for the last 9 months the Pre has been out:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waS1jKCrm5I&feature=player_embedded
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mMIHQhSyw4
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-bGE7FCmDQ

    11. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Funny

      "We weren't the first to this party," Jobs said of the new multitasking feature, "but we're going to be the best. Just like cut and paste."

      Also, apparently Apple is the market leader in cutting and pasting.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    12. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by publiclurker · · Score: 1

      If that's all you honestly want to do with your phone, then you're an idiot to spend the money on an iPhone or any other smart phone for that matter.

    13. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Macka · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You're right. It's not everything inc the kitchen sink multitasking; it's smart multitasking. Multitasking that has the least impact on memory, on cpu, on battery and on the performance of the app running in the foreground (i.e. the one the user actually wants running the most). The app developer can choose what functionality he wants to keep going and let the OS take care of the rest. This is very smart, and if you disagree then you would do well to remember that this is a hand held device, not laptop or a PC, so it needs to be treated differently.

    14. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 1

      If you can block on sockets and do processing on received data you can do IRC/SSH in the background as well ... but if you leave that running you are going to be eating into battery life. Perhaps Skype just gets preferential treatment?

    15. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by bonch · · Score: 0, Troll

      Not only are you flat-out wrong, you throw out "sheep" which proves you're an Apple-hating troll.

      See you in line for an iPad.

    16. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Now if you're trying to sequence a genome while twittering your friends

      Is that what they're calling it these days? Somehow I find that particular combination of words to be... arousing.

      I think I parsed that as 'trying to donate some DNA while $SEX_VERBING my friends' -- in which case, I'm all for it, whatever it is.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    17. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      Also, apparently Apple is the market leader in cutting and pasting.

      No, I think Job's quote was taken out of context.

      They're the leader in the paste-eating market.

      Not sure about the cutting market, but it would make sense -- every emo likes Apple, right?

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    18. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So it basically implements multitasking like Android does it, with state saving and helper processes.

    19. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by venicebeach · · Score: 1

      But one of the categories is "task completion" which is pretty generic sounding.

      A sixth feature, task completion, will enable an app to start a job and continue working on it after the user leaves the app. And example given cited an app posting photos to Flicker, which continued working after the user left that app.

      So, it is possible you could continue to sequence your genome while twittering your friends, although how many friends do you really have if you are sequencing genomes on your phone?

    20. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >So it basically implements multitasking like Android does it, with state saving and helper processes.

      If you mean the new iphone OS coming, I believe so.

      If you mean WebOS, absolutely not. The apps on those cards are "running" and require no helper process. The apps CAN choose to sleep if not needed or if waiting for focus (which only makes sense). The apps are all loaded in RAM and can continue to run... it is true multitasking.

    21. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Yes, sorry I meant to say the new iPhone OS, not WebOS.

    22. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      seeing as the only use for multitasking on a phone anyone has come up with is listening to Pandora or using Skype (both of which they demoed) I think they covered it pretty well.

    23. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      In addition to Skype running all the time, I also get e-mail (pulled from multiple sources), have IM clients open, listen to music, have my latest eBook open, have WMWiFiRouter running (for my computer connection, and often for serving audio from my laptop to my Squeezebox) and many times have a PowerPoint presentation opened and loaded so it's ready to go when I get to my client's office. Some of us do use actual multitasking...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    24. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by cbreak · · Score: 1

      It is not about ability. The iPhone had the capability for multi-tasking since version 1.0. What was not there was the permission to do it for non-apple programs. So, stop writing about stuff you have zero clue about.

    25. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by dhobbit · · Score: 1

      I have, and it doesn't impress me. It is far from true multitasking. If you want to see "slick", you need to look at how Palm WebOS does it, and has been doing it for the last 9 months the Pre has been out:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waS1jKCrm5I&feature=player_embedded
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mMIHQhSyw4
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-bGE7FCmDQ

      Looks pretty, eats battery life. The whole idea of this is not to provide infinite flexibility but instead to provide the best user experience possible. To much flexibility is generally a bad thing.

    26. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by nofx_3 · · Score: 1

      If you read this, you'd quickly realize that ALL apps fall under at least one of the 7 categories, namely ALL apps could potentially take advantage of "Fast App Switching". If it looks like multi-tasking, and your apps don't need to do anything in the background, then what's the difference?

      --
      Visualize Whirled Peas
    27. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      The apps are all loaded in RAM and can continue to run... it is true multitasking.

      You need multitasking like this when your OS is so flaky that you need to run a third-party app that reboots your phone every night.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    28. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Wovel · · Score: 1

      This explains why no one actually wants to pay money for a Pre.

    29. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by sl149q · · Score: 1

      We really need to invent a new term... The iPhone runs Unix. It has multiprocessing, multitasking, and threading. It just doesn't allow multiple 3rd party apps to run at one time or allow a 3rd party app to install and run a background service. Only 3rd party app's are limited to a single task.

      Perhaps "multiapping".

    30. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      If you block you're not going to eat into your battery as much as if you were polling-- the issue with letting the 3rd parties do whatever they want in the background is you can't prevent them from polling.

      You might not even need to block explicitly; I haven't seen how this API works, but if it resembles Grand Central Dispatch you can register blocks of code to run whenever a port has new data-- the port is a "dispatch source" that spins off a block you write. You never block or poll, you just register your handler alot like a signal handler and kevents essentially starts the ball rolling.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    31. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Do you even realize how batshit insane that is.

      So you listen to music on your phone while listening to music on your laptop thru your SqueezeBox with powerpoint open on your phone but not being used even though your carrying you laptop and apparently your SqueezeBox while IMing and reading eMail. I just bet your driving too. Oops forgot your also on Skype.

    32. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 2, Insightful

      iPhones will now be on par with the multitasking ability of Task Swapping in MS-DOS 4.0!

    33. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Apple has always been against mult-tasking because they claim it hampers performance and drains the battery.

      Apple is FOS.

      Android has pretty good reporting on battery life built in. Go to Settings -> About Phone -> Battery Use. The usage of my phone in the 3 hours since being unplugged is as follows:
      Gmail 2%
      Android Core Apps 3%
      Dialler 3%
      Android OS 3%
      Touchdown 3%
      Browser 3%
      Android System 6%
      Cell Standby 19%
      Phone Idle 23%
      Display 38%

      42% of power is being used to keep things running (phone idle is the power used keeping the electronics on), 38% is used by the screen alone 15% is being used by core processes (dialler, core apps, system and OS).

      Only 3% is being used by a constantly running background task, and this is a full blown exchange client, I sense a simple listener like an IM client will use less. Assuming that this scales, I need to have 5 applications running before it's taking up more battery life then the OS itself. Further more Android will be actively killing tasks that don't need to be running.

      Display will always be the largest power draw, followed by cell transmitters, if multi-tasking is a battery problem it's the OS's fault, not multi-tasking.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    34. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they overpatched it or something? I have never had to "reboot" my Pre in the 9 months I have owned it... other than as part of an OS upgrade.

    35. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the 1.6 million units sold. The recent estimates are around 4 to 10 million to be sold this year. That is a hell of a lot of "no one". Did you have some point?

    36. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by earthbound+kid · · Score: 1

      Android already has what Apple is calling "Fast App Switching". Basically, that just means you dump the RAM to the flash memory on quitting and restore on relaunch. That's why many "background" apps in Android take 0% CPU.

      From a user point of view, if I can only see one window at a time, what difference does it make if it's true multitasking or not?

    37. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah yes Palm WebOS. So slick it's got one foot in the grave.

    38. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is that working for them?

    39. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by fredmosby · · Score: 1

      Did you watch the video? According to Apple the iPhone OS version 4 will support all of that in the background except the wireless router.

    40. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by foo+fighter · · Score: 1

      My Sprint Pre has no problem getting me through the day, full of email, texting, tunes (I've been listening to Pandora in the background for almost the last year), web, and a little gaming. It's especially awesome using mytether to turn it into a wi-fi access point for my iPad.

      Multitasking, real multitasking, on WebOS is the best available on a mobile platform. I don't think that's going to change with iPhone OS4. Android doesn't even come close.

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    41. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by ArtDent · · Score: 1

      Wait, are you saying that WebOS won't kill apps when memory gets tight? Does your Pre have a hard drive in there for swap?

    42. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by quacking+duck · · Score: 2, Funny

      "We weren't the first to this party," Jobs said of the new multitasking feature, "but we're going to be the best. Just like cut and paste."

      Also, apparently Apple is the market leader in cutting and pasting.

      In fact, they're so far ahead that even Microsoft has given up and decided to remove it from WinMobile 7!

    43. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Android already has what Apple is calling "Fast App Switching".

      Android also has the capacity to keep applications running in the background. It's a choice given to the developer.

      That's why many "background" apps in Android take 0% CPU.

      The metrics I listed in my previous post were not CPU time, that looks radically different as the transmitter and display are not CPU dependent but still draw power. The metrics were battery usage, draw that can be directly attributed to a component or function.

      From a user point of view, if I can only see one window at a time, what difference does it make if it's true multitasking or not?

      When it actually does something. With Android you have the choice of suspending the applications or keeping it (or part of it) running in the background. For the most part this is a listener or other event that runs without user input, I.E. when my exchange client checks for unread emails or sync the emails I've read in outlook, this does not require me to be actively reading my email client.

      It makes a huge difference if it is true multitasking or not. I can listen to a streaming media application and read an RSS reader at the same time, if I have to shut one down to use the other that matters a lot. What the user perceives and what is actually happening are two different things entirely, saying you don't need something because you don't see it as a user is naive and dangerous in computing.

      This is all besides the point, Apple is FOS when it claims multi-tasking drains battery life, Android and WinMo are proof.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    44. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by hitmark · · Score: 1

      even laptops could benefit from such a system, no?

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    45. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by markdavis · · Score: 1

      No. You can open as many simultaneous cards (apps) as you have available memory (RAM). If you run out of RAM, then you will get a "too many cards open, please close one" error message. This is rarely an issue, except with some of the really big 3D action games which like LOTS of memory. (Palm doubled the RAM & Flash that the Sprint model had, starting with the Verizon model and also the upcoming AT&T version = even more "cards")

    46. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the implication is that his using the iPhone allows him to do smartphone stuff and still answer his phone when his buddy calls. The Android multitasking can make it necessary to completely reboot the device before the user is again able to answer phones (I know this from experience.)

    47. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      Hmmm... Skype is always running so clients can call me wherever I am in the world; right now I am in China, yet my US phone number - Skype - rings me over here (3G is worldwide, you know).

      .
      Instant messaging, same thing. Rather than just text messages, I can get IMs from my clients in the US and Europe, as well as from contacts here in China. In addition to the usual text messages I get.

      At my apartment, I listen to the Squeezebox, in taxis or out and about I enjoy streaming music via Pandora to my cellphone. And I use my cellphone as a WiFi router in my hotel room, or at the apartment, or at a coffee shop.

      See, it's about having all my communication needs consolidated and live all the time on a single device. If someone wants to get in touch with me, there's lots of ways to do it, and I only ever need to use a single device to answer.

      I guess having a single telecommunications device is now considered "batshit insane"? And here I thought these smartphones were supposed to be used to enable and simplify our lives. Silly me!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    48. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      And the WiFi router is integral. I use it wherever I go. I have an unlimited 3G plan in the US and in China, and thus it's my sole Internet connection. It's sitting in its case on my belt, right now, as I'm typing this in the MGM Coffee house in Ningbo, with my laptop, relaxing at lunch. No wires needed, not need to fuss with connecting.

      .
      To me, an always-on, always-available WiFi hotspot is important. I've shared it several times with friends and colleagues; having that kind of access is a "killer feature" to me, and it just works - seamlessly - for me on my HTC Touch Pro 2.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    49. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by H0D_G · · Score: 1

      we're up to posting Unobligatory xkcd? Disappointed.

      --
      Kids! Bringing about Armageddon can be dangerous. Do not attempt it in your home!
    50. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by terjeber · · Score: 1

      Are you really that dumb or are you just pretending? Do you really think there is a way that Apple, or any other company, can prevent an app from allocating too much memory? Before I got my 3GS I had to reboot the iPhone every time I had played Monopoly from EA. Even after I quit Monopoly, memory would be so low that the phone became very troubled indeed. With the 3GS it is a little less of a problem, but I still have to reboot my iPhone about once a week or so, whether I play Monopoly or not. And that is when there is no multitasking apps running.

      Stop sucking Jobs' dick. It isn't pretty with so many star-eyed fans queuing up just to have him sprinkle his semen on them every day.

    51. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      So it basically implements multitasking like Android does it, with state saving and helper processes.

      Yes, except that the catch with iPhone is that the helper processes are hardcoded, and are not extensible. If what you need to do can be handled by one of them, good for you. If not, too bad.

    52. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by sootman · · Score: 1

      Do any of those videos show the Pre stuttering while playing music? 'Cause I *love* that.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    53. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Apple has always been against mult-tasking because they claim it hampers performance and drains the battery. As a Window Mobile user, I can't count the number of times my phone was freaking sluggish only to find that certain apps were running in the background that didn't kill themselves properly.

      As an Android user, I have IM and IRC running in background all the time, and my battery life is just fine. And, no, I don't use any "task killer" applications.

      I understand that it's very convenient to point fingers at poor WinMo while explaining why Apple can't do something right, but that's about as meaningful as saying that KDE4 is awesome because it's better than Vista. Let's compare apples and apples - i.e. modern mobile OS to modern mobile OS.

    54. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      You're right. It's not everything inc the kitchen sink multitasking; it's smart multitasking. Multitasking that has the least impact on memory, on cpu, on battery and on the performance of the app running in the foreground (i.e. the one the user actually wants running the most).

      So, exactly like Android, then, only a year later?

      The app developer can choose what functionality he wants to keep going and let the OS take care of the rest.

      You're right here, but the choice of word matters. The app developer can indeed choose - from a very narrow set of possible choices - what he wants to "keep going". If what he wants isn't available, he's back to square one.

      Wake me up when it is possible to write an IRC client working in background for iPhone. In the meantime, I'll stick to my Nexus One, which handles this scenario just fine and - surprise! - doesn't kill battery while doing so (because it also kills the foreground UI process while leaving worker threads going).

    55. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      My point was that you dont do all of those at the same time and 4.0 solves all of those issues.

    56. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Unrelated but I stand by my Batshit statement. I know several people like you communicating 24/7 but never really saying anything. People that are connected to everything are connected to nothing.

    57. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      Then you don't know me. I work in the US and Asia, and have clients on 5 continents, spanning nearly all timezones. My business - me, an independent acoustical engineer - is 24/7 by necessity of the world. Factories in China and India and Malaysia don't take the weekend off. Berlin and London are up well before the crack of dawn in Seattle, and China and India are just coming on line as Seattle shuts down.

      .
      Business is 24/7, and communications is what drives business. I'd say about 5% of my total communications through my phone - including time spent on /. and one other forum - is personal; nearly all is for business. Being connected is the life-blood of my industry and my business. Which is why I have the phone that I do, and need the functionality it provides.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    58. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Well, Skype and IM are an "always on" kind of thing, they need to be live to ping and show status, etc. WiFi is pretty much an "always on" thing as well. Music - whether from the phone or streamed - is often going and that is always on. And of course the basic phone, GPS/nav when I'm driving (Google Maps), and calendar/task list, etc.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    59. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by rmav · · Score: 1

      In addition to Skype running all the time, I also get e-mail (pulled from multiple sources), have IM clients open, listen to music, have my latest eBook open, have WMWiFiRouter running (for my computer connection, and often for serving audio from my laptop to my Squeezebox) and many times have a PowerPoint presentation opened and loaded so it's ready to go when I get to my client's office. Some of us do use actual multitasking...

      Are you sure you are talking about phones?

      Roberto

    60. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by markdavis · · Score: 1

      I play music all the time and have never had any stuttering. That that was from day one, nine months ago (before the performance increasing updates).

    61. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Apple is half-way there. Specialized background services were exactly the way to go, but those services should have been more general; networking, notifications, and processing. The developer would create their own service from a standard API instead of hooking into Apple's services. You could do anything you want, but your process is subject to a quota to keep it from killing the device. That's the solution I've anticipated since the original SDK presentation where we found out multi-tasking wasn't allowed. So Apple's solution is definitely on the right path, but still too limited.

    62. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Americano · · Score: 1

      And I think it's fantastic that your phone does all that for you, and that you chose a phone based on those requirements.

      You are aware, however that your usage model is quite a bit more advanced than most "normal" users would ever approach, right?

    63. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Is it bad that it made me happy to read this? Sure, it's bad news in the real world for iPhone users, and I shouldn't not care just because I'm not one of them...

      But given that I've become quite anti-Apple, due to principals, I'm kinda relieved that one of the easiest-to-understand bits of evidence that Apple gadgets are crippled hasn't gone away. Am I a bad person?

      --
      Property is theft.
    64. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Macka · · Score: 1

      I'll stick to my Nexus One, which handles this scenario just fine and - surprise! - doesn't kill battery while doing so

      Yeah right. If I google for "nexus one battery life" I get a page full of sorry stories about how bad the battery life is on a Nexus One. The very first link from TechCrunch says: "But I’ve found battery life to be woefully brief, even by iPhone standards".

      And the second one says: "I am experiencing poor battery performance with this phone. Nothing close to what is advertised. Please don't humour me with battery saving tips, tried them all. Still no joy. I have to charge my phone twice a day". I've not bothered looking any further.

      So I refuse to believe your flim flam as evidence points to the contrary.

    65. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Yeah right. If I google for "nexus one battery life" I get a page full of sorry stories about how bad the battery life is on a Nexus One. The very first link from TechCrunch [techcrunch.com] says: "But I’ve found battery life to be woefully brief, even by iPhone standards".

      The complaints are correct in that battery life sucks immediately out of the box. Many people just return it at that point, and write a scathing review.

      What actually happens is that, after you do 5-6 full discharge/charge cycles, it improves dramatically. Even with heavy use of the phone (browser, video playback, 3G/WiFi/Bluetooth all enabled all the time), it easily lasts a day. It's definitely nowhere even near "having charge my phone twice a day" at that point.

      And, in fact, if you googled just a little bit more, you'd have found out all of that yourself - just as I did, when I first ran into the battery life problem.

      There's one other thing that you have to keep in mind when comparing Nexus battery life to iPhone - Nexus has an AMOLED screen. This thing has awesome colors, and drains less battery when drawing black (so e.g. a book reader with bright text on black background is going to be relatively more battery-efficient on it than on iPhone), but when most of the screen is bright, it hogs battery like crazy. And most of the time, when using it, screen is obviously bright - most websites have bright backgrounds, Google Maps uses light colors, etc.

      In fact, Android has a little system application that shows you what applications, services and hardware is draining battery, and how much (in % since last recharge). I generally get 50-70% drain from display, and 10% each from cell and WiFi standby. The only applications that get over 5% are browser and maps, and even then only under really heavy use. No background application I've ever run (IRC, IM) drains over 2%.

    66. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      Well, Skype and IM are an "always on" kind of thing, they need to be live to ping and show status, etc. WiFi is pretty much an "always on" thing as well. Music - whether from the phone or streamed - is often going and that is always on. And of course the basic phone, GPS/nav when I'm driving (Google Maps), and calendar/task list, etc.

      *Sigh* Skype will call an API to register with a service that will listen on behalf of your app for incoming requests which will wake up your Skype apps and allow you to take the call. IM'ing can be handled by notifications where you are connected to a server and that service sends notifications to the apple servers which forward it to your phone.

      Go watch the keynote for yourself. It is up on Apple's site right now.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    67. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, in fact, if you googled just a little bit more, you'd have found out all of that yourself - just as I did, when I first ran into the battery life problem

      Well you do have more of an incentive than me to dig a lot deeper. In your shoes I would too.

      Ok, as this is essentially Linux and what you're looking at is I guess some variant of powertop I can't dispute your numbers. You will probably be able to claim some kind of moral superiority over the way iPhone OS does multitasking going forward. But practically, I don't think it's going to make much difference to most iPhone users. The new multitasking and fast-app switching is what the vast majority if iPhone users have been waiting for, and for them it will do just nicely. Sorry it doesn't meet your standards, but hey, that's life.

    68. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Macka · · Score: 1

      Now why did that post as AC? I did have a Chrome crash half way through typing it, and it did restore the session including what I'd typed. Will watch for that in future.

    69. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Ok, as this is essentially Linux and what you're looking at is I guess some variant of powertop I can't dispute your numbers. You will probably be able to claim some kind of moral superiority over the way iPhone OS does multitasking going forward.

      Not moral - that would be some claim about FOSS or something, which I don't really care much about. It's a technical advantage. It lets me do something useful that I couldn't do with iPhone.

      But practically, I don't think it's going to make much difference to most iPhone users. The new multitasking and fast-app switching is what the vast majority if iPhone users have been waiting for, and for them it will do just nicely.

      I actually agree with that. The willingness of Microsoft to copy Apple's approach, complete with all restrictions (apps installed via market only, no third-party multitasking etc), in WP7, just goes to show that it is a working solution for mainstream platform, and is better in terms of $$$ for the company going with it. So far, at least.

      Which really sucks, to be honest. Back in the day, PC won over Mac because it was more open, and that, in turn, gave rise to a lot of advancements in desktop computing that we enjoy today. But now Apple tries to reverse that trend to the original lock-in model, and, what's worse, they are succeeding. The implications to casual users are not readily apparent, but this will still affect them indirectly by reducing developers' creativity. The abundance of trivial apps in Apple store is a testament to that fact that it is already happening.

    70. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by macsimcon · · Score: 1

      This is what drives me crazy about some iPhone owners. They haven't used a jailbroken iPhone, they haven't used a Pre, and they haven't used an HTC HD2. They claim that multitasking can't be implemented on the iPhone because it would either slow the iPhone down, or greatly diminish battery life. Well, I've used all these phones, and it's possible to multitask on a jailbroken iPhone without it slowing down, and without destroying battery life. Other phones listed above manage to implement true multitasking without sacrificing battery life. It IS possible to do it. Apple has some of the greatest engineering talent around. Are we supposed to believe that HTC or the former iPhone engineers at Palm can extend battery life but Apple can't? If Apple isn't implementing true multitasking, I can only assume it's because they don't want to for their own reasons.

    71. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Do you really think there is a way that Apple, or any other company, can prevent an app from allocating too much memory?

      malloc() does return null every now and then...

      I haven't rebooted my iPhone this year, and I play Monopoly too, so I dunno.. cannot reproduce bug in ticket.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    72. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      At this time, yes. However, 5 years ago VOIP over cell phones was possible, but rarely used; now it's an expected feature. Ten years ago texting was possible and extremely rare; now it's a standard feature. Power users now become the normal user in 3-5 years, and limiting the ability of your OS for power users now necessarily puts you behind in the development race.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    73. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Meaning if I want my applications to be aware, they have to ask Apple for permission and expect Apple to become part of the information pipeline... Interesting! How will that fly in, say, China, where I am currently working? Will the Apple servers be accessible from here, always? Do they play nice with China Mobile and the local Internet connection?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    74. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      Meaning if I want my applications to be aware, they have to ask Apple for permission and expect Apple to become part of the information pipeline... Interesting! How will that fly in, say, China, where I am currently working? Will the Apple servers be accessible from here, always? Do they play nice with China Mobile and the local Internet connection?

      If Apple has a deal with China Mobile to carry the iPhone, I would expect that they are on a "white list" for the great firewall of china as things like push email from mobileme, find my iPhone and notifications all use the persistent connection apple sets up when you have roaming and those services turned on or have wifi signal. They might still scan but not block roaming phones from other countries. Regardless, Apple's servers act as a proxy only for background processing, if you are a in foreground mode, the app should be connecting directly to to the other servers.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    75. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Macka · · Score: 1

      It lets me do something useful that I couldn't do with iPhone

      Well, it's early days yet for us to be saying for certain exactly what the restrictions will/won't allow developers to get away with. They listed one multitasking API/feature as "task completion", what ever that actually means. An example they gave was an app that starts a download, continuing with that download while the user switches away to use another app. Maybe that can be used to continue receiving IRC updates. I'm not an iPhone developer so I can't tell just yet.

      Which really sucks, to be honest. Back in the day, PC won over Mac because it was more open, and that, in turn, gave rise to a lot of advancements in desktop computing that we enjoy today. But now Apple tries to reverse that trend to the original lock-in model, and, what's worse, they are succeeding

      Yeah I know. Several months back I decided to copy my iTunes library onto one of my desktop Linux PCs. I reluctantly took the cost option of upgrading the Library first to the higher bit rate but DRM free format, only to discover afterwards that there were still about 500 songs that had no DRM free equivalent. I was quite pissed off. The result: I sometimes use iTunes online store to help me find music I'm interested in, but I always buy from Amazon now. Apple have lost me as an iTunes customer (and my wife too).

      So I'm fully aware that the iPhone ecosystem has 'lock-in' designed into the very heart of it, but I also want the best user experience I can get from a mobile platform, and right now the competition just doesn't exite me enough to switch. I try and mitigate the lock-in effect by using platform agnostic services as much as possible, e.g. Google for mail, calendar, etc. And by avoiding the use of apps like iWork (on the desktop) that while containing very nice tools use a proprietary file format I can't read elsewhere. Maybe I will switch one day, but not yet.

    76. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by Macka · · Score: 1

      Oh, and one other thing I forgot to mention re: multitasking. Apple's iPhone philosophy here seems to be completely different to Android. In the Q&A wash-up at the end of the iPhone 4 launch SJ voiced his feelings about the competition and said:

      "In multitasking, if you see a task manager... they blew it. Users shouldn't ever have to think about it."

      That's probably the real driver behind their more controlled implementation of multitasking.
       

    77. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      There is no task manager in Android. And Android generally follows the same policy in that background applications are killed (after persisting their state) when OS decides that there are too many running at the same time. The difference is that Android allows applications to spawn their own background threads, but that's about it.

      See this and this for more info.

    78. Re:Multitasking NOT coming to iPhone by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      And both those things should work very well under the multitasking that Apple is supporting.

  6. Multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Oh dear, iphone fans won't like this at all. They hate multitasking. They've been very vocal about it. I doubt they'll like the new iphone at all. They'll probably tell everyone that it's crap now :(

    1. Re:Multitasking by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      Yes, multitasking was evil last week, now it's a sacrament.

    2. Re:Multitasking by JonJ · · Score: 4, Funny

      People that like Apple are flexible, you have to be since you have to bend over all the time.

      --
      -- Linux user #369862
    3. Re:Multitasking by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Wont be much worse than when mac fans cried in terror when tried to use a 2-button mouse. Fortunately, this "multitasking" on the iphone will be so delimited by apple policies that they wont notice it most of the time.

    4. Re:Multitasking by amasiancrasian · · Score: 2, Funny

      How I wish I had mod points for you! Steve Jobs also jokes that he's God:

      Q: Why have you veered away from widgets on the iPad? A: We just shipped it on Saturday. And then we rested on Sunday. Q: So widgets are possible? A: Everything is possible.

      Although some aren't so sure he's joking...

    5. Re:Multitasking by medcalf · · Score: 1

      It's not that we hate multitasking. It's that we hate excessive chrome and we hate having our batteries die because some useless crap is running in the background and we forgot about it. Simplicity is good in a mobile device. (On the desktop, it's a different world, so the requirements are different. On the server, it's a different world yet again, though desktops have basically adopted much of servers' paradigms and vice versa (GUIs on servers and daemons on desktops, oh my!). I haven't seen Apple's implementation yet, but I sincerely hope it involves minimal (and obvious) chrome and allows me to easily kill off processes, or keep them from backgrounding in the first place. If not, I'll have to be a lot more careful about which apps I use.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    6. Re:Multitasking by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      What do you mean?

      We have always been at war with Multitasking.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    7. Re:Multitasking by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not that we hate multitasking. It's that we hate excessive chrome and we hate having our batteries die because some useless crap is running in the background and we forgot about it.

      So rather than replace the offending app, or tell the developer to fix a bug in that rogue app, we'll just eliminate an entire, basic category of OS functionality for everyone. Makes sense in a SteveJobsian sort of way...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    8. Re:Multitasking by medcalf · · Score: 1

      Well, you have to remember that you and I are not the target audience, and that these are not general-purpose computers. The iPhone and iPod touch are special-purpose devices that are remarkably flexible for what they are. The iPad is an application-running appliance for short-duration interactions and media consumption. The tradeoffs Apple has made have been to make the devices work for those purposes and for the majority of non-technical users. For technical users, or people who want to do other things, well, go find another platform. A lot of the complaining just floors me, being on the order of: My car won't provide a luxury ride while also being a tugboat - waah! I mean, come on, it's just not a general purpose computer, and wishing won't make it so.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    9. Re:Multitasking by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1
      Sure, I understand the argument, I simply do not agree with it. Having more functionality available - now - than the normal user needs is what allows new uses and new applications to be created.

      .
      And why can't it be a general purpose computer? There's precious little I cannot do on my cell phone that I cannot do on a 1995 laptop. The UI is a bit more cramped in terms of the keyboard, but I have 256 MB or RAM, 8 GB of storage, an 800x480 full color screen, networking, etc.

      Back in 1982, a green 80x25 CRT was plenty, you didn't need mass storage nor networking. The typical user had no need for a personal computer, so why build any of that functionality or growth capability into a computer?

      The real need for multitasking may not be for today's users, but for today's dreamers and programmers and inventors to create the next generation tools and applications. Locking the OS from providing real multitasking will severely hinder that kind of development. And given that Android, Symbian, and Windows Mobile offer real multitasking, it seems extremely counter-intuitive.

      iPhones and iPads are hot because they're trendy; if they stumble in their popularity, or something starts to eclipse them, then developers will jump in droves to those platforms which are popular, growing AND have the capability and functionality desired to really make the products shine.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    10. Re:Multitasking by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Well, you have to remember that you and I are not the target audience, and that these are not general-purpose computers.

      To be fair, the whole "general-purpose" thingy is strictly a matter of positioning & marketing. For example, Nokia calls N900 a "mobile computer" rather than a "smartphone".

      In practice, with open software ecosystem, it is a general-purpose device for all intents and purposes. You only turn it into a specialized one by locking it down from there, as Apple does.

  7. Whoa, whoa by Bluesman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wait a second here. Wasn't the lack of multitasking a feature that made the iPad and iPhone so great? It allowed you to relax and compute!

    What are they doing? Why is Apple taking all of the zen out?

    --
    If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    1. Re:Whoa, whoa by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the lack of multitasking a feature that made the iPad and iPhone so great?

      No, the lack of runaway background processes was what made Apple products so great. As well as the lack of battery drain that these processes caused is what made Apple products so great.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Whoa, whoa by tgibbs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wasn't the lack of multitasking a feature that made the iPad and iPhone so great?

      Not particularly. In fact, they've always had multitasking, just not for 3rd party apps. What made them great was having a consistently fast, responsive user interface and reliable essential functions that did not bog down because of apps hogging the processor. But everybody figured that Apple would eventually work out a way to offer background processing to 3rd party developers while maintaining those strengths.

    3. Re:Whoa, whoa by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Yes and Apple fan boys hated Intel chips (they even applauded the Apple ad with the snail carrying a Pentium II) until Steve endorsed it.

    4. Re:Whoa, whoa by ShecoDu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "In multitasking, if you see a task manager, they blew it. Users shouldn’t have to ever, ever, ever think about that stuff."

      Fast forward a year

      "In this new iPhone OS 5.0, we've working on a new revolutionary feature, a real task manager, this is going to greatly improve your experience with the devices, it's so great, even we are amazed!"

    5. Re:Whoa, whoa by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Funny

      it also makes them less useful. a brick is also very functional, but on it's own only good for throwing.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    6. Re:Whoa, whoa by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      No, the switch to Intel happened when IBM kept hosing Apple with lower than expected clock speeds and a lack of G5 for the laptops.

      After over a year of not being able to get to 3 GHz in the desktops and not making 2 GHz in the laptops people were ready for a change.

      Back when the Pentium II snail was up against G3s, Apple-IBM-Motorola were smoking Intel. When the G4 came out and Intel was struggling with copper processes they were still beating them in desktop machines. The G5 came out and did well for a while but IBM decided to switch their focus on the 360 chip and Apple was up a creek.

    7. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Very well put. All the Apple apologists out there were lauding the lack of multitasking as a feature, not a bug, saying it enhanced the usability of the device and made it much better than its competitors. Now that King Jobs has announced multitasking support they are falling over themselves to applaud his decision, even though it goes against everything he was saying up until now. Got to love the way Jobs announces Apple will do multitasking better, "Just like we did with copy and paste". That's just hilariously grandiose.

    8. Re:Whoa, whoa by Bluesman · · Score: 1

      This is my favorite Mac fan characteristic...the complete 180 when the new thing comes out with absolutely no hint of compunction.

      I remember when they were singing the praises of cooperative multitasking.

      --
      If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
    9. Re:Whoa, whoa by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      So you like your phone taking many seconds to respond to you? And that you have to charge your phone everyday instead of every few days. I have a Windows Mobile phone for work. I can assure I don't find those aspect more useful.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    10. Re:Whoa, whoa by fedcb22 · · Score: 1

      I know right? Personally, I hate it when I press a button on my Nokia N900 and it takes 583.2pi*c^2 seconds to respond.

    11. Re:Whoa, whoa by Knara · · Score: 1

      I had an iPhone 3GS I had to charge every day. I want to know what sort of micromanagement you're doing on your iPhone where you can go "a few days" without charging it.

    12. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What made them great was having a consistently fast, responsive user interface

      Apparently you haven't spent much time using a real iPhone. Safari checkerboards all the time just scrolling around a site. If I get a text, the process of switching out of Safari into the SMS app and then back to Safari can literally take a full minute depending upon the site I was browsing.

      Hardly qualifies as a "consistently fast, responsive user interface".

    13. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just call the interface fast? Oh you must have a 4th gen iPhone because the original and 3G are dog slow.

    14. Re:Whoa, whoa by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      I've used Windows Mobile, oh, only since 2004. I am a heavy multitasking user. The battery generally lasts for two-three days as long as I am not using my heavy Sennheiser headphones while listening FLAC encoded files. The phone is responsive and useful at the same time. If you are too stupid to use Windows Mobile, what the hell are you doing on Slashdot?

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    15. Re:Whoa, whoa by flanders123 · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the lack of multitasking a feature that made the iPad and iPhone so great?

      Not particularly..

      Actually, Apple did spin lack of multitasking as sort of a 'feature' back in the Iphone 3G launch. See this blog of the Iphone 3G launch. Scroll down to 11:00 AM:

      Scott [Forrestal of iPhone software development] says the wrong solution is background processes. It kills battery life and performance in other applications. Microsoft uses a task manager with a horrifying interface in Windows Mobile. "This is nuts."

      I remember finding this spin particularly silly....but purchased one regardless....Stupid Jobs and his Jedi mind trick :-)

    16. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nice 1st gen iphone you have there. Meanwhile my friend has an Eris from 6 months ago and can't wait to upgrade to a faster android phone.

      He also download a Twitter App which "helpfully" downloads tweets in the background all day, halving his battery life and massively decreased responsiveness on his already-slow phone. And this is coming from one of you android-tards.

    17. Re:Whoa, whoa by mikestew · · Score: 1

      If you are too stupid to use Windows Mobile, what the hell are you doing on Slashdot?

      Seriously? A "you're too stupid to use it" come back? Look, if your phone's OS requires the user to pass your personal intelligence test, it's broken.

    18. Re:Whoa, whoa by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Scott [Forrestal of iPhone software development] says the wrong solution is background processes. It kills battery life and performance in other applications. Microsoft uses a task manager with a horrifying interface in Windows Mobile. "This is nuts."

      I remember finding this spin particularly silly....but purchased one regardless....Stupid Jobs and his Jedi mind trick :-)

      You can label me a fanboy if you like, but I just wanted to touch on this topic for a sec. The biggest difference bewtween my iPhone and the previous 'smart' phones I had is that I can take it for granted. My Treo, POS Motorola, and Nokia 3650 have all frozen at inopportune times, meaning I wasn't getting calls. (or having alarms go off...) All three of those had to be rebooted at least once month. In the year that I've had it, I have only rebooted my iPhone due to a glitch a couple of times. With the other phones I just got used to the idea that I should check them once in a while to make sure they're okay.. even pre-emptively rebooting them if I was heading somewhere where phone service was important. The same goes for battery life. My iPhone's battery usage has been surprisingly consistent. I cannot say the same for the Treo or the Motorola. (Actually the Nokia was better behaved in that regard, lasted longer, too.)

      My iPhone became the PDA I've always wanted, right down to being able to rely on it as an alarm clock. I used to own Microsoft PocketPC's and there is no fucking way I would EVER own a phone based on that OS. My girlfriend has an HTC Fuze and her experience with that is almost comical. She hasn't even tried installing an app on it, yet her email spontaneously broke and now she cannot send attachments. It regularly freezes and its battery often dies after only being off the charger like 4 hours. This sort of thing wouldn't have shocked me a whole lot back when I had a Treo, but after a year with this phone I can't believe she hasn't replaced the bloody thing.

      So... yes, maybe I'm a fan boy, maybe I 'drank the kool aid' or whatever, but I agree with Apple's decision to withhold the multi-tasking. Don't get me wrong, I'm looking forward to being able to multi-task with it. (Well I would be if I had a supported phone... GRR.) But if in a flurry of iPhone App downloads the masses' phones started acting all screwy, Apple would have been sunk. I think Blackberry users would probably get what I'm talking about.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    19. Re:Whoa, whoa by spintriae · · Score: 1

      reliable essential functions

      Oh sweet. iPhone supports Google Voice now? And it runs in the background? Nice!

      Oh wait, you must mean the functions that Apple decides are essential to me...too bad I still have a mind of my own and the ability to decide what I do and don't need. I guess I'll stick with Android until that changes due to stroke, lobotomy, etc.

    20. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand this... why do people like to complain just for the sake of complaining? could Apple have released all these features on version 1? maybe but they would probably be buggy... what's wrong with taking things slow? making things as functional as they can be when they release it? I don't understand... it's their first go in a mobile OS not counting the Newton OS, I don't think they are just adding these features with out previous planning, they probably have a road map and it's not public for obvious reasons

      if you don't like it don't buy it and if you haven't used for a considerable amount of time don't act like you're an expect on it...

    21. Re:Whoa, whoa by Volguus+Zildrohar · · Score: 0, Troll

      All the Apple apologists out there were lauding the lack of multitasking as a feature, not a bug

      I love the emotionally charged bullshit on both sides of this crapfest. A bug! Apple really wanted multitasking in the first release, but some stinking off-by-one errors forced them into pretending it was by design...

      You just can't get this sort of entertainment with sane people.

      --
      When confronted with one problem, some think "I'll use recursion". Now they are confronted with one problem.
    22. Re:Whoa, whoa by adamstew · · Score: 1

      They make dandy paper weights too. Both the iPhone and the Brick.

      (Disclaimer: I do have an iPhone, and love it. It is truly exceptional at holding down those papers)

    23. Re:Whoa, whoa by quadelirus · · Score: 1

      I liked his comment about seeing the stylus means blowing it.

      I mean, I am an Apple fanboi and all, but I am going to buy a stylus for my iPad, so I guess Steve blew it :-).

    24. Re:Whoa, whoa by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      No, it is not. Some people are even too stupid to use a VCR or to drive a car properly, but that does not mean that either VCR or the car are broken. As the old saying goes, "if you create a system that any idiot can use, then only idiots will find it useful".

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    25. Re:Whoa, whoa by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      He's probably not using any apps or taking any calls.

      Oh, wait...

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    26. Re:Whoa, whoa by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      Remember kids: the full quote is "The lack of runaway background processes is what made Apple products less useful." - timmarhy (659436)

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    27. Re:Whoa, whoa by Lars+T. · · Score: 0, Troll

      I certainly never heard anything like "who needs touch based interfaces" - "yeah, Android" or "GUIs suck" - "yeah, Kubuntu"

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    28. Re:Whoa, whoa by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      not using it as a phone is my guess

      my GF had her 3GS on plane-mode while on vacation (because of the excessive data-roaming charges), and suddenly battery-life is almost a week.. it basically becomes and ipod touch with a larger battery, and it survives on zero power :P

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    29. Re:Whoa, whoa by paving-slab · · Score: 1

      The reason for not including these features from the start is simple - It gets people to buy the latest model.

      They could easily have had all this functionality from the start, there's nothing innovative or revolutionary added, it's all basic stuff that other phones have had for years.

    30. Re:Whoa, whoa by Bertie · · Score: 1

      I went to Glastonbury (big English festival in a field) last year with an iPhone. I got there on Wednesday afternoon with a fully charged phone and did all the obvious power-saving things, like turning off 3G, WiFi and Bluetooth. I turned the phone off when I went to sleep (which wasn't much). I was on the phone a lot, co-ordinating meetups between different groups of friends, because text messages couldn't be relied on to arrive in timely fashion due to the network being completely overwhelmed. I even did a little bit of browsing, took a few photos, and even played the odd song through the built-in speaker. The phone made it through to Sunday evening.

      I was actually really impressed, I'd expected it to keel over by Friday. You might call that micromanagement, but I wasn't doing anything particularly drastic.

    31. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fwiw, multi taking is not coming to the devices Apple said were too slow to support it, eg, Original and 3G, but it is to those more than twice as fast, the 3GS and the 4G. But, you go on and enjoy your gloating. (The no Flash CS5 compiled apps thing is amazing in it's level of spite however.)

    32. Re:Whoa, whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But everybody figured that Apple would eventually work out a way to offer background processing to 3rd party developers while maintaining those strengths.

      And they did a splendid job.

  8. app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as wel by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as well.

    I can see some lock down but for censorship???

  9. And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS... by magsol · · Score: 3, Informative

    (or the presumed new iPhone to accompany OS 4.0)

    ...then yeah, no multitasking for you. Sorry about that.

    --
    "I'd just like to emphasise that taking a million years isn't a metaphor here..." -Rich Bradshaw
  10. Can the old hardware handle this? by dan_sdot · · Score: 1

    Will the current iPhone hardware be able to handle this new OS?

    I ended up having to get rid of my original iPhone and get a 3GS because all the OS updates slowed my iPhone down to a crawl for any given operation.

    1. Re:Can the old hardware handle this? by proxima · · Score: 3, Informative

      Will the current iPhone hardware be able to handle this new OS?

      I ended up having to get rid of my original iPhone and get a 3GS because all the OS updates slowed my iPhone down to a crawl for any given operation.

      The 3G and second gen ipod touch can get the update, but no multitasking support.

      The 3GS and third gen ipod touch get multitasking (probably in large part because they have 256MB of RAM instead of 128).

      --
      "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    2. Re:Can the old hardware handle this? by adolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, good. This means that iTunes will stop pestering me about upgrading my first-gen iPod Touch to the latest-and-greatest firmware.

    3. Re:Can the old hardware handle this? by am+2k · · Score: 1

      You know that there's a checkbox in that dialog saying "don't annoy me any more"?

    4. Re:Can the old hardware handle this? by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1

      You know that there's a checkbox in that dialog saying "don't annoy me any more"?

      It stops annoying you about that one update. After they release a new one, it pops up again.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

  11. Apple "Innovation" by Microlith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Couple things:

    The multitasking method described is essentially identical to the one MS is using, with the process being halted in the background and the potential for it to be freed from memory at any time. The new addition is a background daemon or two that a program can contact to leave bits running while the rest is halted. Sort of a "low power multitasking." This is actually quite clever, and makes me wonder if it isn't using Grand Central closures to keep those bits spinning while the main process is halted.

    The task switching method has apparently been cited as looking extremely similar to the way S60 switches. I wouldn't know, but that's pretty funny if true.

    All in all, the critical juncture remains for me: The platform has been and will remain extremely closed. That alone is enough to ensure that I will stick with my N900 for the time being, and likely well into the future. I'll put my OS and developer interests behind MeeGo, and encourage openness.

    1. Re:Apple "Innovation" by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The multitasking method described is essentially identical to the one MS is using, with the process being halted in the background and the potential for it to be freed from memory at any time.

      God, I hope not. I hope Apple does a better job of not letting background processes suck up all the processing power and battery that some apps on my Windows Mobile phone did.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Apple "Innovation" by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      It sounds an awful lot like cooperative multitasking. I wonder if they have to call a yield() function... Which sucks.

    3. Re:Apple "Innovation" by arndawg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He's talking about WP7 not windows mobile. WM has true multi-tasking

    4. Re:Apple "Innovation" by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      He's referring to the new WinMo version that hasn't been released yet.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    5. Re:Apple "Innovation" by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The multitasking method described is essentially identical to the one MS is using, with the process being halted in the background and the potential for it to be freed from memory at any time.

      Wait - since when did WinMo ever used such a method? IIRC, the main problem with background processes in WinMo was precisely that they didn't do that, but rather just ran as on any other OS - so if a process was CPU-intensive, it quickly drained battery.

      What you describe sounds much more like the way Android does things.

      This is actually quite clever, and makes me wonder if it isn't using Grand Central closures to keep those bits spinning while the main process is halted.

      So far as I can see, they don't let you run arbitrary code in background. They just provide a bunch of OS services that do, with which your app can work (ask to do something, or subscribe for a notification).

  12. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by cdrudge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's their store. If you don't like it, don't buy their device. Or jailbreak it.

  13. Why would I want to multitask? by bogaboga · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Can someone tell me why I would want a multitasking phone yet this study says it adversely affects brain learning?

    1. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by dingen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because you want to be able to look something up (through your browser, in your mailbox, whatever) while having a conversation on Skype.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by czmax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A good reason for the OS to support multitasking: Assume you hit 'upload' in your favorite application and now want to do something else while the data is slowly streaming out to the server. This allows you to move on to do something else.

      You aren't the one multitasking though because, from your perspective, you're done with that previous task. This lets the application/OS do the multitasking that allows you to move on and do something else. Apple would argue this "good" vs making you think about it as a new task: "I want this upload to complete so I'll run this application in the background while I do something else then I'll come back and close this application when it is done". In the latter case you truly are doing the multitasking.

    3. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by Culture20 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Can someone tell me why I would want a multitasking phone yet this study says it adversely affects brain learning?

      Because a phone is not a brain? A mutitasking computer helps *me* to not multitask by doing things in the background for me. "You, program. Do this. Okay, now that that is being worked on, I can forget about it until it's done."

    4. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by swanzilla · · Score: 4, Funny

      Can someone tell me why I would want a multitasking phone yet this study says it adversely affects brain learning?

      I don't follow your line of reasoning, but find it fascinating.

    5. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Funny

      [scratches head while reading your comment] I don't see any advantage on multitasking neither, we humans must be designed against doing more than a thing at once.

    6. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by Nick+Ives · · Score: 2, Informative

      Funny comment :)

      Multitasking slows down human learning, so don't try to learn Spanish whilst making cheesy bacon chips. You'll get distracted!

      This is why we have hardware like phones and computers to multitask for us.

      --
      Nick
    7. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by terjeber · · Score: 1

      We are, that is why, every time your hear beats, you find it such a problem to draw a breath.

    8. Re:Why would I want to multitask? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Afraid not, it's your inner chimp that's doing the scratching.

  14. NO thanks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I was considering getting an ***LOW INTEREST MORTAGES*** Iphone, but this new ad framework might ***ALL-NATURAL COLONIC CLEANSE*** force me to reconsider. Will ads only be shown when ad-supported apps are running, or ***HOT SLASHDOTTERS WANT TO TALK TO YOU!!!*** will you be interrupted with ads no matter where you are?

    1. Re:NO thanks by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Will ads only be shown when ad-supported apps are running...

      Yes.

      or ***HOT SLASHDOTTERS WANT TO TALK TO YOU!!!*** will you be interrupted with ads no matter where you are?

      I'm sorry, but it's hard to take you seriously when you're happily posting on an ad-supported site about how you say 'no-thanks' to ad-supported apps.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:NO thanks by Werrismys · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but it's hard to take you seriously when you're happily posting on an ad-supported site about how you say 'no-thanks' to ad-supported apps.

      Slashdot has ads? (checks it out with safari...) OMG :-) I was unaware. Thank you, adblock.

      --
      'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
    3. Re:NO thanks by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Yes it does. It's still ad-supported even if you block it, too.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  15. MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by spiritgreywolf · · Score: 1

    Isn't that something even Outlook can't seem to do without setting up multiple email profiles? I find this pretty amusing, actually.
    I'm not talking about using them as multiple IMAP connections, but rather as native Exchange connections as configured using the Outlook setup wizard... ...Sorry, been stuck in Outlook Hell lately and that struck a chord...

    --
    Never have a philosophy which supports a lack of courage
    1. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      Account options > More options > Advanced > Open These Additional Mailboxes

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    2. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by dingen · · Score: 1

      To make things even nicer, they've created a unified inbox which includes the e-mail from all your accounts, be them Exchange, Gmail, Hotmail, POP3, IMAP or mix of everything. You can still filter by account, but having just a list with *all* your e-mails is really nice.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    3. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by KuNgFo0 · · Score: 1

      Account options > More options > Advanced > Open These Additional Mailboxes

      Unfortunately that method opens up the secondary mailbox in the same context as the primary account - same server, same login credentials.

      However... I've been using the Office 2010 beta and FYI they finally added true multiple-exchange account support.

    4. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by Knara · · Score: 1

      Account options > More options > Advanced > Open These Additional Mailboxes

      Unfortunately that method opens up the secondary mailbox in the same context as the primary account - same server, same login credentials.

      However... I've been using the Office 2010 beta and FYI they finally added true multiple-exchange account support.

      My question is, how many users really need that particular option? What does that ability fill that "open mailbox on start" doesn't?

    5. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by Knara · · Score: 1

      I totally get the unified inbox thing. I'm just confused about the need for multiple exchange accounts. How many people need to list more than one exchange account at a time in a way that "open other mailbox on start" doesn't handle?

    6. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by dingen · · Score: 1

      I have no idea, I guess it is one of those "corporate enterprise features". I never get or use those.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    7. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      I totally get the unified inbox thing. I'm just confused about the need for multiple exchange accounts. How many people need to list more than one exchange account at a time in a way that "open other mailbox on start" doesn't handle?

      GMail offers support exchange mode or at least an emulation of Exchange. So it is possible that someone might want to setup both their corporate exchange account and their Gmail account as exchange on the same phone. Before, this was not possible and you would have to use exchange for work email and IMAP for Gmail.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    8. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Glad to see they got functionality that WinMo has had since 5.0... Got 5 POPs, an Exchange server, two Hotmail accounts, and Gmail all in a nice little list!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    9. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Isn't that something even Exchange can't seem to do without setting up multiple email profiles?

      Fixed that for you.

      This is something Exchange requires, one account per profile. Now many email clients I've seen have been able to create multiple profiles and drop them into a single repository (inbox), the one I use on Android (Touchdown) has been able to handle multiple exchange accounts for some time, so has the default HTC and Motorola Exchange client (Work Email) both a bit better then Outlook.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    10. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I have a work Exchange Account, a University Exchange Account. If I want to access both in Outlook, I have to create multiple profiles and can not use both at the same time without using the hacked outlook launcher.

    11. Re:MULTIPLE Exchange accounts?! by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Indeed and some people have accounts on more than one exchange server. Not just different mailboxes but different systems entirely. Employer, Client and University for example.

  16. like there isnt enough spyware already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Apple store is full of spyware, Apple validating it with their own API will make it even worse
    , with the inability of the user to install a firewall or control it makes it a security nightmare

    this guy figured it out
    http://i-phone-home.blogspot.com/

  17. Welcome to the N900 age by EzInKy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now if only iPhone owners could do what they want with the hardware they purchased.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vijayiyer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tell me about it. iPhone owners want to run Sendmail on the iphone they purchased and ssh into it from their laptop.

      Oh wait, maybe it actually does do what they want, just not what _you_ want. Is it possible that the N900 is right for you and the iPhone right for others?

    2. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by uberjack · · Score: 1

      "iPhone OS 4.0 - Now With More Nazi Germany!" TM & (C)

    3. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please speak for me more.

    4. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Microlith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or how about the simple ability to pick an app that was denied entry into the App Store? Say, Opera Mobile if Apple denies it again.

    5. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vadim_t · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The thing is "what I want" is different for different people.

      On the n900, if you want to run sendmail on it, sure, you can. If you don't want to, you don't have to. It doesn't have to be something as geeky as running sendmail on it, though. Maybe what I want is porn or tethering, or scanning for wifi networks.

      On the iPhone what you can do is limited to what Apple thinks users should be doing, and that list keeps shrinking.

    6. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by frdmfghtr · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh wait, maybe it actually does do what they want, just not what _you_ want. Is it possible that the N900 is right for you and the iPhone right for others?

      Of course not...what *I* want is what everybody wants, they just don't know it!

      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    7. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by gmuslera · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why i could not play music while reading a web page/book or taking a photo? Or playing music, updating my gps, and running a pedometer while walking? Or being able to receive skype calls while doing anything else?

      Some of the most obvious uses of multitasking were covered by this apple update (mostly around voip, audiostreaming, and gps), but a few is not the same as everything to the core. Maybe the average iphone owner dont want to ssh to their phones, but you always ends finding a situation where you would want that your smartphone do more than a thing at once.

    8. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by codepunk · · Score: 1

      Fork over the 100 bucks and you can put any thing you please on your phone.

      --


      Got Code?
    9. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? I often listen to music while browsing the web, and while using the MotionX GPS app. Do you people just make stuff about the iPhone up?

    10. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vague+disclaimer · · Score: 1
      Now if only iPhone owners could do what they want with the hardware they purchased.

      They can. They just void their warranties. Same as with any other warrantied item.

    11. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by k2r · · Score: 2, Informative

      You don't own an iPhone, obviously.

      > play music while reading a web page/book or taking a photo?
      You can already, iTunes will happily play on while you're doing something else.

      > Or playing music, updating my gps, and running a pedometer while walking?
      You can already, runkeeper.app happily records my running-tracks for me every other day while I'm listening to Music.

      >Or being able to receive skype calls while doing anything else?
      This could already be implemented using the push-service. Maybe Skype does this already, I don't know.

    12. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Um they can dummy.

      Nothing in the world is stopping you from doing anything you want with the hardware. Just dont expect to still use Apples software and services if you do.

    13. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by qwertyatwork · · Score: 1

      Jail break plus ssh and sendmail. WTF? sendmail on your phone? Really? Is having sendmail on your phone something you consider before buying it? I know you didn't post that, I'm just saying.

    14. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Microlith · · Score: 1

      Why should you pay -more- to do something with your property that you should reasonably expect to be able to do anyway?

    15. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I can SSH into my laptop with any of a half dozen apps now :)

      People that want to run Sendmail on their phone are misguided geeks who think they know more than they actually do.

    16. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vijayiyer · · Score: 1

      Your intelligent post leads me to believe that you're really close to understanding why Apple does what they do without realizing it. The scanning for wifi and tethering are _also_ geeky when you really think about it (and tethering is officially available, just not on AT&T). Not the way you or I might, but the way your local baker does.
      Apple limits what geeks do so that the phone works with minimal failure for ordinary people. For the vast majority of people, what the iPhone does is very enabling because they're not even aware of what it can't do. If Apple started letting people use private APIs (which is why the WiFi scanners got pulled), and they changed the private API someday, it would break the user experience. Would your baker understand "oh, the developer used a private API subject to change" or would they instead say "this damned iPhone (and people will equate apps with the device) is crashing"?
      The bottom line is that different devices make different tradeoffs. They're not right or wrong, but different and make different people happy.

    17. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by khchung · · Score: 2, Informative

      What are you talking about? On my iPhone (not jailbroken) I can listen to music while reading a web page or navigating with TomTom just fine. Not sure what you mean by "updating gps" though, and I don't use skype so can't comment on those.

      Seems like you are seriously misinformed about the capability of the iPhone, it multitasks just fine for things that many users actually uses. I am well aware of its limitations (eg sucky Bluetooth support) but those are things I can live with.

      --
      Oliver.
    18. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      Except if the majority of users, who do not care at all if their phone runs "open source" software or not, will then buy and iPhone or similar.
      Then N900's and friends die, and there's only 1 choice (or copies of the same model/choice), using various DRMs, vendor lock-ins, and completely closed environment and they won't even realize there was ever an alternative.

      Cause like, DRM's and lockins have proven to be good for the market and the customer right? I mean, FSF and this weirdo hairy dude must be completely wrong after all.

      Oh, snap, I thought it was all about ssh and sendmail!

    19. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I know you like to spout nonsense.

      But when you say:
      "Play music while reading a web page/book, or taking a photo"
      you can.
      you could always.
      you could on iPhone 2G, and you still can on iPhone 3G.

      what you *COULDNT* do was play streaming music, say off a web page or via a streaming music app at the same time as reading a web page or taking a photo.

      Thats because you couldnt run a 3rd party app at the same time. It had multitasking.

    20. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they can already do it. And if there the type to run the n900, then there the type to jailbreak.

      they know the software is good, they just want to bitch, cause apple is the new microsoft.

      These people are idiots, and they own one or two apple products regardless.

    21. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vadim_t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, I know. Every lack of anything in an Apple product is an user friendly feature. If it can't do it, then you didn't need it anyway. If it's added later, then it's a sign of Apple's awesomeness.

      If you don't believe me, just search the past apple discussions on slashdot, back when there was no store, and look at all the people talking about how it's not needed anyway, and how web apps will fulfill everybody's needs.

      I'd bet that the people currently talking about how there's no need for multitasking will forget they ever said that the moment Apple releases a phone that can. I remember quite well that back in the OS 9 days it also was intuitive as heck, and things like the need to manually set the amount of memory an application could use was something that made perfect sense. The 1 button mice were also an user friendly feature, right until they started shipping normal ones.

    22. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Tom · · Score: 1

      They can.

      End of story, really. Everything else is whining and artificial overcomplication. When you buy an iPhone, you can be extremely well informed about what it can and can't do. In fact, that info is much easier to come by than for almost all competitors.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    23. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      You can already, iTunes will happily play on while you're doing something else.

      this has been debated time and time again, sure the ipod app runns in the background, but any internet stream wont currently. So if you are fine with being limited to the mp3s on your device for no technically sounds reason, sure the iphone already does that.

      The point is so much that you cant do *specific feature X*, since there is a limited set of apple-provided features which work just fine, the point is that you are limited specificly to whatever apple choses to provide, which is a bit odd in this day and age for a mobile device of this caliber

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    24. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, people want us to believe iphone is THE smartphone, THE best phone in the world. It isn't, that's all we're saying.
      But iphone and ipad are powerful computing devices that are capable of so much more. If people don't want to use it at their full potential, fine, there is people using a superpowered machine to do nothing but play solitaire, no problem with that. But why on earth would apple not allow those that want something to do it, if it's physically possible on the device is beyond me sometimes.

    25. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't you learned to be wary when anybody tells you "i know what you want"?

    26. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. If it doesn't do what you want, why did you purchase it? Because it's cool? Lame reason, when you eventually want to put it to use.

      It's a consumer device. If you don't want to be treated as a consumer, use something that lets you produce.

    27. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by jaavaaguru · · Score: 1

      I want to be able to do text messaging, home & work email, surf the web with a decent browser, use iTunes and iTunes Remote, and use maps/GPS. That is all.

      I had a Blackberry before the iPhone and wished I could do what I wanted to do with it. I imagine I'd be thinking the same with a lot of other smartphones.

    28. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by mqduck · · Score: 1

      The issue isn't whether what I (or EzInKy) want to do with the iPhone is what many other people want to do with it, or even if most people are able to do most things they'd like to. The issue, and it's not insignificant, is that you can't do what *you* want with *your* iPhone, no matter what it happens to be.

      --
      Property is theft.
    29. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Americano · · Score: 1

      Maybe what I want is porn

      Also available on the iPhone. Just point your browser to spankwire.com!

      or tethering,

      Also available on the iPhone, it's AT&T that's dragging their feet on this, other carriers have supported tethering with the iPhone for some time.

      or scanning for wifi networks

      Also quite possible on the iPhone. Settings -> Wi-Fi -> Choose a Network - if a network is found, it will display the name right there for you.

      that list keeps shrinking.

      So by adding hundreds of new API calls, and several new - and pretty major - features, Apple is *shrinking* the list of what is possible on the iPhone? More really is less, we finally have proof!

    30. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Americano · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know. Every lack of anything in an Apple product is an user friendly feature.

      So by this logic, throwing every piece of functionality everyone might want into an Apple product is, and then releasing a steaming pile of turd where nothing quite works right is more user friendly?

      Apple has said, time and again, that they prefer to focus on getting a core set of features "right", and then expanding that set of features. This is exactly what their track record has shown with the iPhone, iPod, iPod Touch, and Mac OS. Perhaps the expansion happens at a slower pace than you'd prefer, and I guess that's unfortunate for you. But for those of us who don't want to spend our time dicking around with someone else's application, I'd much prefer having a more-limited set of features that works reliably.

      You like your N900. That's fabulous for you. I personally hate physical keyboards with little buttons that my thumbs always end up pressing several of - I have big hands. I've also had several terrible experiences with Nokia phones from Sprint in the past that simply refused to function properly - enough so that I steer clear of Nokia based on that experience. By contrast, my iPhone does what I want it to (makes phone calls, plays music, allows me to check and send some emails, and browse the web) and does it well, and I have very little need for the openness and advanced functionality of the N900. So I happen to like the iPhone. Different strokes for different folks, right?

      Let's make a deal: I won't tell you that you don't need anything but a hammer to do home improvements if you'll agree to not tell me all I need is a ratchet set and screwdriver. Sound good?

    31. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Americano · · Score: 1

      Except if the majority of users, who do not care at all if their phone runs "open source" software or not, will then buy and iPhone or similar.

      Slippery slope is slippery! Why would the N900 die, if there is a small but vocal segment of the market which loves it so? And as long as the free market exists, Apple will never be able to exterminate all of its competitors. Just as Microsoft never did, despite its best efforts. There will always be alternatives, and you could even build one of your own in a free market system.

      So Apple does something you don't approve of (selling locked-down devices), and since they don't appear to give two hot squirts of piss about the opinion of "That Guy from Slashdot," they continue on locking down their devices. You fear that in the future, your freedoms will be taken away if people aren't somehow brought into the light about open software today. What solution do you propose then? Should we restrict users' choices in an effort to force them to be free? Should there be a law preventing Apple from selling any device that isn't completely open, free and hackable, and forcing them to include every scrap of source code they've written?

      Or would it be a better idea to vote with your dollars and support companies whose business model you find more amenable to your open source ideology, and continuing to evangelize about the benefits of open source for everybody?

      Because I'm sorry, 90% of the arguments about Apple come across this way: "Apple should be forced to embrace freedom." And I find a rich irony in the fact that people who profess to love and desire freedom don't also see that that includes the freedom to make *bad* choices, as defined by your value system. Apple should be free to sell devices in any way it sees fit; if those devices offend the freedom-loving sensibilities of too many people, they will not sell, and Apple will have learned a valuable lesson about the value of openness to its potential customers.

    32. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Americano · · Score: 1

      And why some people would drive at 60 miles an hour when it's physically possible to do 120 is beyond me sometimes - and why the state would set such an arbitrary maximum is beyond me! Why some people would buy a Jeep and then only drive it on a road is beyond me sometimes. Why some people would buy a camera that can take pictures underwater and then not go scuba diving with it is beyond me sometimes. Why some people would buy a high-end contractor's drill to hang a single picture is beyond me sometimes.

      Sometimes - and this is true for most people - it's not about what the "theoretical maximum" is. Apple gets this, and they are choosing to trade maximum user flexibility for simplicity. For some users this will not be sufficient - and they absolutely should not buy apple products, and instead buy the products that do offer the features they need. For other users, it's exactly what they want: simple, don't care what it "can do," only care that it does what it "does do" well, and with minimum fuss.

      For everybody who professes to not get it, you need to understand that YOUR requirements and desires are not universal. If you're reading slashdot, it's entirely likely that YOUR requirements and desires are at best a niche market which doesn't reflect much of the requirements and desires of the general public.

    33. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vadim_t · · Score: 1

      So by this logic, throwing every piece of functionality everyone might want into an Apple product is, and then releasing a steaming pile of turd where nothing quite works right is more user friendly?

      Of course not, in exact the same way as the lack of something isn't automatically good or user friendly. If you really believe what you said above, then you should also agree with my previous sentence.

      Now look at what the grandparent wrote. Tethering and wifi scanning are instantly dismissed as "geeky" even though tethering is a widely wanted function that can be invisible until you try to use it, and scanning is an entirely normal thing to do when using wifi and pretty much comes with the technology. He couldn't find a reply for the porn part though, so he just silently skipped it instead of either admitting that I might have a point, or providing a rebuttal.

      You like your N900. That's fabulous for you.

      You like your iPhone. That's fabulous for you. I personally hate (insert the rest here)

      Let's make a deal: I won't tell you that you don't need anything but a hammer to do home improvements if you'll agree to not tell me all I need is a ratchet set and screwdriver. Sound good?

      No deal. This is the Internet. I accept that you may say whatever you wish. Accept that I may reply as I wish, and you'll be happier.

    34. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Americano · · Score: 1

      Of course not, in exact the same way as the lack of something isn't automatically good or user friendly. If you really believe what you said above, then you should also agree with my previous sentence.

      Of course I agree with that - I think either extreme is a ridiculous farce. With that in mind, however, Apple *has* demonstrated time and again that the "lack" of something initially (cf. Native iPhone SDK, copy & paste, and now multitasking) is usually because they are spending time "getting it right," for some value of "right" that they decide upon in the context of their design goals.

      And for many of these things that they've added post-release, I'd submit that they do a surprisingly good job of making them user-friendly implementations - witness the positive responses to copy & paste, and ask an iPhone developer about the usability and usefulness of the APIs - I've heard nothing but positive feedback about how relatively simple coding to the APIs is.

      Personally, I'd rather wait a little longer for a feature to be done right than have a device that was rushed to market with all the features Slashdot thinks it should have. That said, if I absolutely needed tethering for my laptop, I wouldn't own an iPhone. I sincerely hope that people criticizing these "must have" features have not done themselves the disservice of buying an iPhone which doesn't have the features they claim they need.

      Tethering and wifi scanning are instantly dismissed as "geeky" even though tethering is a widely wanted function that can be invisible until you try to use it, and scanning is an entirely normal thing to do when using wifi and pretty much comes with the technology.

      And you can do both of those with the iPhone today. You cannot tether on the AT&T network because AT&T has disallowed it, but the device (and OS) itself supports both. Incidentally, from the day it was released with a WiFi model, it supported wifi scanning, so I'm not sure what you're on about with that. And for the record, tethering *is* a fairly geeky use case. It's incredibly convenient, but it's more of a power-user function than it is a "common use" item.

      As for your porn requirement, mobile.spankwire.com works great on my iPhone. Maybe you should check it out, plenty of free streaming porn, over 3G or WiFi. Perfect for that early morning wank when you just don't feel like walking over to the computer.

      No deal. This is the Internet. I accept that you may say whatever you wish. Accept that I may reply as I wish, and you'll be happier.

      The question was intended in the sense that I was asking if we can agree that there is no "one right tool" for all jobs and purposes, and that what is appropriate for your needs may not be universally appropriate for everyone else's needs.

      But yeah, I can see how trading adversarial "this is the internet, fuck you's" would be a much better solution. It increases understanding on both sides of the issue, and really fosters civil discussion.

    35. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Americano · · Score: 1

      The issue, and it's not insignificant, is that you can't do what *you* want with *your* iPhone, no matter what it happens to be.

      Fact: *I* can do everything *I* want to do with *my* iPhone.

      I think I've just proved your theorem to be false. Perhaps you'd like to restate it in a way that doesn't take the intellectually sloppy route of claiming to speak for everybody who has ever bought, used, or wanted an iPhone?

    36. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by vadim_t · · Score: 1

      Of course I agree with that - I think either extreme is a ridiculous farce. With that in mind, however, Apple *has* demonstrated time and again that the "lack" of something initially (cf. Native iPhone SDK, copy & paste, and now multitasking) is usually because they are spending time "getting it right," for some value of "right" that they decide upon in the context of their design goals.

      That's something that makes sense, but people very rarely actually say it that way.

      It's unusual to see "Applications/multitasking/etc would be nice to have, but I can wait until they get them right". No, it's usually "You don't need applications/multitasking/etc", which instantly changes to "Applications/multitasking/etc are awesome" the moment it gets fixed.

      As for your porn requirement, mobile.spankwire.com works great on my iPhone. Maybe you should check it out, plenty of free streaming porn, over 3G or WiFi. Perfect for that early morning wank when you just don't feel like walking over to the computer.

      I was speaking about the applications. Personally not my kind of thing, but due to the complaints of "geekiness" about the other examples, I figured this one wouldn't have that problem.

      The question was intended in the sense that I was asking if we can agree that there is no "one right tool" for all jobs and purposes, and that what is appropriate for your needs may not be universally appropriate for everyone else's needs.

      You should read what you originally replied to, then. I wasn't talking about any specific product. The subject matter was something like "my issues with claims made by some apple fanboys". You can agree or disagree with that, but it's not a post about a tool, and in fact should be right or wrong independently of the actual characteristics of any products.

    37. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, how about something useful the average person might actually want to do. Send a photo via bluetooth to another phone. No, emailing it is not good enough, the iPhone helpfully downscales the photos when emailing them. Why the fuck can the iPhone which (unsubsidised) cost at least 6 times as much as my cheap PAYG phone not do something my cheap phone can. It is crap like this, not to mention the other stuff they lock down which is why I won't buy Apple's products. The iPhone I was trying to transfer the photos from was my friend's, not mine.

    38. Re:Welcome to the N900 age by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

      Microsoft and zillion others, did kill many, many companies actually. Very few survive and it's never granted what will happen next. Most are new companies actually in that case.

      The idea is not to talk to Apple, as they won't read any of these comments (positive or negative, mind you), simply to share ones own ideas with others - that's what we're doing here.

      As for why people should be forced to embrace freedom, this is a controversial statement, but i'll take the example of the USA's ideology that they should enforce freedom everywhere and help everyone (yeah i'm simplifying).

      I think it's a good thing (not the way they make it happen - or fail to do so, just the idea).

      People living in slavery will not realize it, and many will be against it "if they want to be slave let them" "if they want poor living conditions, or die in horrible pain, let them".

      Except they do not really choose on their own, they are merely conditioned to accept this choice.

      And that, is what my point is all about.

      I'll add for the sake of arguing, as I doubt you see through my words anything else than "i must counter-attack":

      Should there be a law preventing Apple from selling any device that isn't completely open, free and hackable, and forcing them to include every scrap of source code they've written?
       

      There is a law preventing regular people to hack into closed devices that they own and paid for, that is as ridiculous as the above proposed law.
      In fact, the above proposed law is not *that* ridiculous. An open device let people ensure it is functioning properly, does no harm and has no hidden problem (nothing much to see with "open source evangelism" here actually)
      We are accepting this due to the copyright laws and how one should be able to protect his creation and get retribution for it.

      I perfectly agree that retribution must be done and have no proposal for it, it is out of the current discussion scope anyway, however the protection goes against "What Is Right" in my mind.

  18. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but on the bright side, you don't get ads either.....

  19. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by pureevilmatt · · Score: 0, Troll

    Or, you jailbreak, install Backgrounder and Kirikae, and have an even better implementation than the one crApple demonstrated... all on your hardware that "can't possibly support it".

  20. Apple's "preview" page by lucas+teh+geek · · Score: 1
    --
    TIAEAE!
    1. Re:Apple's "preview" page by hitmark · · Score: 1

      kinda funny seeing them haviing to define compatible itouch based on year released, as there is little other way of telling them apart.

      the phantom is dead, long live the phantom...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
  21. Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This disastrous update makes it clear Apple is internally shitting bricks over the iPhone losing market-share and Google's Android exploding in sales, userbase, and developer support.

    Desperation lawsuit against HTC.
    This pathetic attempt at trying to claim the iPhone can actually multi-task like Android.
    The absolutely embarrassingly lame attempt by Jobs to attack Android over porn.

    It's just going to keep getting worse with the rate Android is leaving the crappy old iPhone OS behind and the absolute flood of new Android based devices that make the iPhone hardware look like old 1970s pocket calculators in comparison.

    1. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by jcr · · Score: 1, Funny

      This disastrous update makes it clear Apple is internally shitting bricks over the iPhone losing market-share and Google's Android exploding in sales, userbase, and developer support

      What color is the sky on your planet?

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by dingen · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's just going to keep getting worse with the rate Android is leaving the crappy old iPhone OS behind and the absolute flood of new Android based devices that make the iPhone hardware look like old 1970s pocket calculators in comparison.

      Actually, the rate at which new devices are coming out is holding developers back at truly using Android to it's potential. Android is awesome as a platform, but in the end applications make or break the experience of your device. I tried to find 10 decent games for Android tonight and it was an absolute pain to get things that weren't complete pieces of crap. The quality of the apps in Apple's App Store is really *a lot* better, there's more to choose from and they're generally cheaper too. Android's got some serious work in this field until they can really compete.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    3. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by revlayle · · Score: 1

      i don't think his planet has a "sky" - yes, it's THAT alien (this coming from and android phone owner - i like my android phone, but apple has nothing major to worry about yet, i am sure they do see android as a competitor, but not one that is necessarily winning... yet)

    4. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1
      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    5. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Obyron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As opposed to the iPhone, where you have your choice of fart apps, or clones of crayon physics games.

      --
      --Obyron
    6. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by geekoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, he is accurate.
      The Android platform is growing very fast, and already on many different devices. It also has had all these new features the Apple is just now getting around to putting into the iPhone. Plus several features the iPhone doesn't have.

      Let see:
      Easier and cheaper to develop for
      On a lot of devices over 20 different device
      coming out on a lot more devices a half dozen tables are slated for EOY
      user can load what they want on it, so dev son't need to go through the Apple hoops. It's an option the user has to turn on, but it's there.

      the iPhone was ahead of it's time, but not any longer. Now it's playing catch up.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    7. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by dingen · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm not saying that there isn't a lot of crap in the App Store too. But there's quality there that's absolutely unmatched on Android. Games like DrawRace, Flight Control, I Dig It, Racer, GeoDefense, not to mention classics like Lemonade Tycoon or SimCity... all truly fun and great games. That sort of stuff just isn't there for Android.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    8. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by bonch · · Score: 0, Troll

      The Android platform is growing very fast

      Going from 5 users to 20 users is an amazing 400% increase! iPhone is doomed!

    9. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      And in a poll of 20,000 hypothetical consumers on the street, the number who have heard of Android is? The number who know what an iPhone is, is?

      Android is gaining ground (as expected - it is a clear competitor) but it is nowhere near troubling Apple yet, purely due to exposure and marketing (which is highly important).

      Android also has some serious downsides compared to the iPhone, chief among them being fragmentation of the platform - not all the apps work on all the handsets, and there are numerous versions of the software out there on different handsets. Version control is poor, the app marketplace behaves oddly - working fine on one device, but failing on another device on the same wireless network. You can't browse the marketplace officially in a web browser (I mean seriously, wtf! no brainer).

      There are pros and cons to both platforms, purely by nature of their business models.

    10. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by k2r · · Score: 0, Troll

      > Easier and cheaper to develop for
      If Cocoa Touch and Objective C are too complicated for you I don't think I'm interested in the applications you are about to develop.

      Of course, there are other valid reasons to prefer different frameworks / languages, but I don't see "easier" an one...

    11. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked, testing and debugging on 20 different devices, some of which have touch screens, some don't, some have keyboards, some don't, isn't "Easier and cheaper to develop for".

    12. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by stony3k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In a lot of ways this reminds of the start of "Macs vs PCs". Apple wants more control, so other manufacturers flock to the second best choice. This results in a whole lot of "hype" for the alternate which ends up winning the battle.

      --
      Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes. - Mahatma Gandhi
    13. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Easier and cheaper to develop for' - ummm.. Devs choose a platform for several reasons - first of all the iTunes App Store pulls in scads of money for devs. That is the primary driver currently. Android devs simply aren't making any money. So let's say you spend 2 months writing an app, and earn $2000. How much did it cost you to write that app? If you're not a student good luck paying your rent as an Android dev.

      Now, as far as 'easier to develop for' - maybe it will seem that way for the first week or so until you can read Obj-C code (and if you already know Java). But you still have to learn all of the Android specific things like memory management, UI layouts, toolchains, app deployment etc. And what about writing part of your app in native code to squeeze out the best performance for a game - now you have 2 separate APIs to code to, 2 or more languages to use, and your build is more complex etc. And debugging into native code will be harder because of the context shifts. So I think you are wrong on the easier to develop for part - once you know Obj-C, the Apple tools are much easier because everything is native APIs and the tools are all done by Apple so they just work out of the box. And Cocoa is simply brilliant. The combination of XCode and Interface Builder is almost a RAD environment it is so productive. There is a reason that there are exponentially more and much better apps for the iPhone.

    14. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Easier and cheaper to develop for

      More profitable to develop on iPhone.

      > On a lot of devices over 20 different device

      More app incompatibility problems. As time goes by, testing becomes more and more expensive.

      > user can load what they want on it, so dev son't need to go through the Apple hoops.

      All apps availble for iPhone are centralized in one place, easy to find WITH reviews, and easy to install. Apple trained their customers to pay for apps so it's more worth the developer's time to jump through those hoops. More ambitious apps are made as a result.

      It's not all sunshine and roses for Android.

    15. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Android also has some serious downsides compared to the iPhone, chief among them being fragmentation of the platform - not all the apps work on all the handsets,

      Apple's remaining advantage in that respect ended on Saturday. Now iDevelopers have to deal with different screen resolutions too, and they always had to deal with different feature sets if they wanted to work across the full range of iPhones, iPod Touch and now iPad.

    16. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by mjwx · · Score: 1

      What a stupid comment. There is way better in the app store than fart apps and crayon physics games.

      I mean you're right, there are also tower defence games.

      The Apple-haters are out in full force on Slashdot today.

      It appears the fanboys are out in full force today, labelling anything remotely discouraging of Apple as the work of a "hater". The OP was making a joke, HINT: this comment was is well, for the most part.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    17. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easier and cheaper to develop for

      Subjective on the easier front.

      On a lot of devices over 20 different device
      coming out on a lot more devices a half dozen tables are slated for EOY

      This doesn't make it easier to develop for when you have to take into account different device characteristics, different sized screens etc.

      user can load what they want on it, so dev son't need to go through the Apple hoops. It's an option the user has to turn on, but it's there.

      Yep anyone would have to agree with that.

      the iPhone was ahead of it's time, but not any longer. Now it's playing catch up.

      I wouldn't say the iPhone was ahead of its time ... I would say that it was on time. Generally devices that are ahead of their time tend to not do well in the market until someone hits the right time and product execution to make a killing. I would say the iPhone has probably been of its time. As for playing catching up ... yes its evolving, and I would say it is happily out-doing or on par with features/execution to most mobile platform OS's for its target implementation, and with 4.0 I would say that it will not falling behind anywhere from an implementation perspective.

    18. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      GeoDefense... Is that what Apple calls updates patching the exploits used to jailbreak the iPhone?

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    19. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by amRadioHed · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why not panic? Those N1 sales are with basically no advertising. If Google decided to start running TV ads round the clock like Apple does those sales figures could change pretty quickly.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    20. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by WilyCoder · · Score: 1

      You code in assembly, right? RIGHT?

    21. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Android has its own fart apps too, FYI.

    22. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by jketch · · Score: 1

      Because the Nexus One is the only Android phone on the planet.

    23. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop your trolling!

      Having so many devices, each with different hardware - and likely as time rolls on, different versions of Android is going to create a horrible mess for developers to support.

      Having a stable hardware and application ecosystem is a huge part in the success and overall quality of applications on the iPhone which ultimately improves usability immensely.

      I don't think the argument of not liking the App Store just because you can't use another one is really a good one at all. The benefits in software quality of a closed system are immediately obvious, and add to that the simplicity of all users being able to access so many applications in one place and know that they will work on their phone is just fantastic. I'm not even going to go into the security side benefits!

      And as for development being easier, I suggest to you Sir that you don't speak of what you do not know.

    24. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      Objective C isn't too complicated, it's just ancient. It was hot stuff back in 1990. I prefer to spend my time with modern cross-platform object oriented languages. With Objective C you might as well be programming in Assembly Language, for all it's lack of utility outside the tiny world of Mac OS (4% of the computers in the world).

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    25. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Stan+Vassilev · · Score: 2, Informative

      On a lot of devices over 20 different device

      That's a *feature*? "Yay we get to target 20 different CPU characteristics / featuresets / screensizes etc.!"

      Nope, not a feature at all.

    26. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The absolutely embarrassingly lame attempt by Jobs to attack Android over porn.

      Yeah, Steve looked really embarrassed. Reality check: porn might not be an issue for you, but for parents buying their kids a device it most definitely is.

      Oh and,

      the absolute flood of new Android based devices that make the iPhone hardware look like old 1970s pocket calculators in comparison

      Have you actually used an Android phone?

    27. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by quadelirus · · Score: 1

      On a lot of devices over 20 different device [sic]

      That is precisely the problem with Android. Couple that with the fact that half the devices haven't been updated to the newest version of Android because the cell carriers have control and it is plain to see that developing for the iPhone is much easier. Fewer devices to worry about is a good thing for a developer. We only care about how many users there are. It is one of the reasons why MS has in the past had a harder time getting Windows to work with ALL computers than Apple has with Mac OS X on Apple computers. The more variety there is in devices the harder it is for a developer to make sure the thing works well on all of them.

    28. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you know C syntax, it takes about the same amount of time to learn Objective C as it would Java. Possibly even less time than Java since Java has so many more differences.

      I don't see why Objective C's age should be a problem at all. It's not as if the language stopped evolving in 1990. It has a garbage collector (admittedly not yet available on the mobile devices), closures, and an OOP system that blows Java's out of the water. In just about every respect other than portability it soundly beats Java to a bloody pulp.

    29. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by ArtDent · · Score: 1

      Heh. I remember people saying that about iPhone when it was just shy of 10% market share, too.

    30. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's a feature. Not everyone wants the same form factor. Some people prefer physical keyboards. Some prefer flips. Some like the elegant functional simplicity of Nexus One. And Android offers developers the ability to target all those user categories at once.

    31. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Actually, the rate at which new devices are coming out is holding developers back at truly using Android to it's potential.

      Why new phones coming out would hold back developers? They can just code to the present-day baseline API, and know that their software will still run.

      At least, so far, all well-written apps for Android 1.5 I've seen run fine on my Nexus with 2.1.

    32. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      an option the user has to turn on, but it's there

      This being posted on /. I'll assume I need to compile a custom build of the Android OS with a flag turned on and then edit a handfull of config files.

    33. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ahh, the typical Apple approach to things.

      "What, that??! That's not a feature!". "Multitasking? That just drains your battery, nobody wants that!".

      Android will bury Apple for the same reason the PC buried the Mac. There will be a dozen companies coming out with fancy new hardware at a breakneck pace that Apple cannot keep up with.

      It's already happening - the HTC Evo is to the iPhone what the iPhone was to an el-cheap Windows Mobile phone. Sure, the next iPhone will bridge the gap but Jesus, what's coming out later this year in the Android camp? I can't imagine.

    34. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      As opposed to the iPhone, where you have your choice of fart apps, or clones of crayon physics games.

      Be fair, even with those you have more choices with Android. Less apps overall maybe, but certainly more of those.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    35. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/02/16/google-now-shipping-60000-android-handsets-per-day/ Google and their hardware partners are now shipping 60,000 Android handsets each day. While Apple is shipping a measly 90,000. Yeah, obviously Apple is soooo doomed.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    36. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - cheaper to develop? $100 licence for IDE is not much.
      - On a lot of devices over 20 different device? Actually it's a huge disadvantage. You have test your app on each one of them.
      - coming out on a lot more devices a half dozen tables are slated for EOY. See previous point.
      - user can load what they want on it. Agree.

    37. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just going to keep getting worse with the rate Android is leaving the crappy old iPhone OS behind and the absolute flood of new Android based devices that make the iPhone hardware look like old 1970s pocket calculators in comparison.

      Actually, the rate at which new devices are coming out is holding developers back at truly using Android to it's potential. Android is awesome as a platform, but in the end applications make or break the experience of your device. I tried to find 10 decent games for Android tonight and it was an absolute pain to get things that weren't complete pieces of crap. The quality of the apps in Apple's App Store is really *a lot* better, there's more to choose from and they're generally cheaper too. Android's got some serious work in this field until they can really compete.

      Get snesoid and gensoid, and enjoy 1000s of high-quality games from Nintendo and Sega which beat the crap out of all native Android games AND all native iPhone games. IMHO.

    38. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Von+Helmet · · Score: 1

      Android will bury Apple for the same reason the PC buried the Mac.

      While I really have no idea about whether Android devices will overtake the iPhone, it's absurd to claim that PCs have "buried" the Mac. While PCs have the market share the Mac platform is patently alive and well. One might also raise the issue of Apple's stock price and market cap, though of course it's hard to pick out how much of that is due to the iPhone, iTunes, the iPod, etc as opposed to Mac computers.

    39. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by yabos · · Score: 1

      Zune brown

    40. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by yabos · · Score: 1

      Yeah, out of the 170,000 apps, the fart apps make up a significant percentage, NOT

    41. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      I think you're a troll, but I'll reply anyway. Some games I really enjoyed on the iPhone: Civilization, SimCity, RedAlert, TapDefense, Lux, (Settlers of) Catan, Fingerzilla, Bridges, Strongholds and Cat Piano.

      That's 10 good funny games from the top of my head that I can name without even consulting what I actually have installed. I just remember these because they are fun.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    42. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      A man with a radio up his nose?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    43. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Optic7 · · Score: 1

      Wait, you're comparing Apple's stock price and market cap to what exactly? Microsoft's stock price and market cap? To be fair you would have to compare to the combined stock prices and market caps of every company that makes PCs (HP, Lenovo, Dell, etc) plus Microsoft.

    44. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Von+Helmet · · Score: 1

      I'm not comparing them to anything really, except to their own past values. Apple's market cap has recently exceeded that of Wal*Mart, and their share price has been similarly growing.

      Besides, I wasn't saying they were outstripping everyone else, just that they are by no means dying.

    45. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Obyron · · Score: 1

      If you think everyone who disagrees with you is a Troll, then I suppose so. Which is pretty much par for the course here, home of the -1 I Disagree mod.

      --
      --Obyron
    46. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      gaming is one segment of the market. if that's all you care about then you'd be better off getting a dedicated gaming handheld anyway. and, it's not like there are no games. there are quite a few good ones, but i agree the app store has a much better selection.

      for every other type of app, the android market contains high quality rivals to anything in the app store. maybe there are only 50 notepad apps on the android market vs. 1500 in the app store, but i can live with that.

      the reason you don't see as many high-quality games on android is because those games take a lot of resources to produce and the companies that make them are as of yet not seeing their efforts on android translate to big $, like on the iphone.

    47. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (T)he PC buried the Mac.

      .

      Apple were going to takeover the corporate office with their "easy to use" hardware and software.
      Pure pie in the sky

    48. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by jcr · · Score: 1

      If you know C syntax, it takes about the same amount of time to learn Objective C as it would Java.

      No, not nearly that long. Objective-C only adds a handful of new keywords, and the method call syntax. Whenever I've taught people Cocoa programming, they're able to get Objective C in a day.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    49. Re:Apple Is Absolute Panic Mode Over Android by pydev · · Score: 1

      It's a mobile phone with an already iffy battery life and a tiny screen. Are you really going to play games on that? I'm not. I bought a bunch of games for my iPhone and hardly ever played them. Same with Android.

      In terms of the things that count, productivity apps, communication, media, etc., Android beats iPhone hands down; iPhone is too locked down. Look at some of the gyrations that iPhone and iPad apps have to go through just to get PDF and Office files up/downloaded. It's ridiculous and it's not going to get fixed in iPhone OS 4.0.

  22. Whoa, whoa, multitasking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I guess this guy won't be getting an iPad for his wife: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1529896&cid=30951078

    1. Re:Whoa, whoa, multitasking? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, he can still get an iPad for his wife, because the "multitasking" the iPhad is getting isn't what most people would call multitasking.

      Basically, they're adding the ability for third party apps to invoke APIs that provide "multitasking" support - assuming that they do the things that Apple has decided to allow them to do.

      If you want to have two applications running at the same time - forget it. THAT'S not allowed.

      If Apple wants to allow an app to continue to stream music while you're surfing the web - that's allowed. As long as the app doesn't come too close to "duplicating the iPod app" in which case they'd reject it.

  23. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by rsborg · · Score: 1

    Wrong. 3rd-gen iPod Touches (ie, 32GB, 64GB models released in 2009) work also.
    Presumably this is due to the lack of the performance/capability of the chipset found in the 2G, 3G iPhones and 1st & 2nd gen iPod Touch.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  24. :'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cry a little louder and harder, bitches! We can't hear you from way up here on awesome mountain! What's that? You're mad and are going to form an open committee to discuss ways to retort in a GPL-based, socially pluralistic manner? In three years time, you'll have a shoddily constructed riposte AND a donated-by-Cory handkerchief with which to wipe away your salty tears? Keep debating, pansies! I'll be figuring out a way to put some TRUCK NUTS on my iPad.

    1. Re::'( poor open source babies by crazyjimmy · · Score: 3, Funny

      Cry a little louder and harder, bitches! We can't hear you from way up here on awesome mountain! What's that? You're mad and are going to form an open committee to discuss ways to retort in a GPL-based, socially pluralistic manner? In three years time, you'll have a shoddily constructed riposte AND a donated-by-Cory handkerchief with which to wipe away your salty tears? Keep debating, pansies! I'll be figuring out a way to put some TRUCK NUTS on my iPad.

      I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the Awesome of my Android.

    2. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which one? One of the phones stuck on 1.6? Or did you wait over a month for the 2.1 for Roids? Sorry, DROID.

      Meanwhile, I was walking down the street with my iPhone, just walkin down the street, minding my own business, just walkin down the street, right? So I was walking down the street, minding my own business, right, and BOOM, two girls jumped out of nowhere and gave me a blowjay.

      THAT'S THE POWER OF THE IPHONE.

    3. Re::'( poor open source babies by guspasho · · Score: 1

      That's because your Android doesn't have a manual mute switch like my awesome-but-muted iPhone does.

    4. Re::'( poor open source babies by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, I was walking down the street with my iPhone, just walkin down the street, minding my own business, just walkin down the street, right? So I was walking down the street, minding my own business, right, and BOOM, two girls jumped out of nowhere and gave me a blowjay.

      THAT'S THE POWER OF THE IPHONE.

      which of course happened in the virtual world of the new version of iNeedToJustifyThis for the iPhone.

    5. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... figuring out a way to put some "Apple iNUTS - TRUCK version" on my iPad.

      Fixed that for you.
      One question though... Compensating for a lack of something?

    6. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sure they didn't come from Carvel? They ain't never give ya no napkins at Carvel, right?

    7. Re::'( poor open source babies by mswhippingboy · · Score: 1

      You've convinced me! We should all just open our wallets and offer them up to great iJobs. He is the new master of the universe (now that BG has retired). Why should we write software for anything but Apple products - oh, but only if the master says it's ok.

      --
      Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
    8. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not awesome mountain, that's just a large pile of shit.

    9. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, I can't hear you! Please take the hoagie out of your mouth. And, on the subject of virtual worlds, how's your Second Life girlfriend? Oh, she dumped you, you say? FOR A GUY WITH AN IPHONE?

      Damn.

    10. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but does it run Linux^H^H^H^H^HTRUCK NUTS?

    11. Re::'( poor open source babies by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      My three year old nokia brick already has full multitasking support... This just adds functionality to the iphone which less high end (and expensive) phones have had for years...

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    12. Re::'( poor open source babies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not open source babies.

      They are , as Steve Jobs calls them, FREETARDS!

    13. Re::'( poor open source babies by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      Android is a distant, fractured third place to webOS and iPhone OS. Palm's hardware sucked and Apple likes to make money, now that they've figured out how, but it doesn't make Android any less crappy. Deal.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  25. Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other languages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No mention of the fact that Apple has banned all applications that weren't originally written in C, C++. or Obj-C? When Adobe was scheduled to release Flash CS5 with support for compilation to iPhone Applications on the 12th?

    http://daringfireball.net/

  26. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iPhone 3G is also compatible. See the bottom of this page: http://www.apple.com/iphone/preview-iphone-os/

    The only products that can't take the upgrade are the original iPhone and the 1st generation iPod Touch.

  27. Adware built right into the OS by Flipao · · Score: 2, Informative

    Only Apple could get away with promoting that as a feature: Pay for an app, fire it up and watch an ad for Nike, can't wait!

    1. Re:Adware built right into the OS by byjove · · Score: 1

      For developers, this is a feature. This was a developer preview.

    2. Re:Adware built right into the OS by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Not to point out the obvious (ok, I am going to point out something obvious), but I'm going to guess apps like that won't be very popular. Why would you subject yourself to that when there is another app that is just as good but doesn't have advertising? In general if you want advertising to work on your app, it's going to have to be either so unobtrusive that people don't mind it, or some niche app that can't be reproduced easily (but for some reason people are not willing to pay for). For most apps the cost barrier for creation is so low, and Apple is paying all the hosting costs, that if you create a good app with advertising, someone else will create the same thing without advertising.

      --
      Qxe4
    3. Re:Adware built right into the OS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is FUD. There are tons of "free" ad supported apps on the iphone right now. Google serves some of them. Why shouldn't apple serve some and put it in their SDK?

    4. Re:Adware built right into the OS by c_forq · · Score: 1

      I feel I have to respond since you were modded insightful instead of funny. This is for the free apps that display ads (like a few of the ones I have). These applications can now use iAds if they want, or can use AdMob, Greystripe, or roll their own solution.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    5. Re:Adware built right into the OS by Flipao · · Score: 1

      I feel I have to respond since you were modded insightful instead of funny. This is for the free apps that display ads (like a few of the ones I have). These applications can now use iAds if they want, or can use AdMob, Greystripe, or roll their own solution.

      This is what Steve Jobs said:

      • The average iPhone user spends 30 minutes a day running iPhone apps.
      • If you put an ad in every three minutes, you get three ads every 10-minute period.
      • We will have shipped 100 million iPhone/iPod Touches by this summer.

      Doesn't sound to me like he's limiting himself to free, ad supported ads.

      And we haven't even touched on the privacy issues.

    6. Re:Adware built right into the OS by BearRanger · · Score: 1

      Because it can be the same app. If I release a free, ad supported version of an app that doesn't have all of the bells and whistles (i.e. a "lite" version) you get to discover how awesome my app is, and I get to make money from advertising. Then you decide that you actually need some of those bells and whistles. You then pay my asking price for the full app. The ads go away, because the full version doesn't have them.

      The free version allowed you to discover my app. I got to make some money off of my work, and some people are happy with this level of service. For the people that need more, I get to make a reasonable return on my work from just the sale price of the app. And they aren't annoyed by advertising.

      Seems to me this is a good deal for the developer and the customer. You may still be correct, but I'd wager that a developer would rather make money on their work than not make money, if they have the choice.

    7. Re:Adware built right into the OS by c_forq · · Score: 1

      Of course he's not limiting himself to only free apps, just as right now paid apps can run ads if they want to (for example the CNN does this). Very few companies can get away with this though, most users will refuse to pay for most applications with ads.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    8. Re:Adware built right into the OS by Flipao · · Score: 1

      My point being, if a company can get away with this, it's Apple.

      This article pretty much sums it up.

    9. Re:Adware built right into the OS by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Actually, this functionality has been present in Android for quite some time now. A lot of apps from Market come in paid version, and free ad-supported one.

  28. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or you could just buy an android device and have all that functionality included.

  29. Apple Market Fragmentation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So now you have iPhone developers having to worry about which hardware they are running on:

    * Older OSes that can't multi-task versus newer iPhone hardware

    * Larger screen sizes on the piece of junk iPad versus the tiny iPhone screen rez

    Isn't 'fragmentation' the latest talking point for Apple and Apple fans in the media after the 'teh most apps' failed to have any effect on slowing down the massive Android surge?

    1. Re:Apple Market Fragmentation. by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      So now you have iPhone developers having to worry about which hardware they are running on:

      * Older OSes that can't multi-task versus newer iPhone hardware

      * Larger screen sizes on the piece of junk iPad versus the tiny iPhone screen rez

      Isn't 'fragmentation' the latest talking point for Apple and Apple fans in the media after the 'teh most apps' failed to have any effect on slowing down the massive Android surge?

      Wrong on so many levels. The programmer does not have to worry about any of that. If they call the API, the OS will either allow multitasking on the machine it is running or it won't. If you create a universal app to run on the iPhone and iPad, you call the API to find out which type of machine you are running on and then run that codebase.

      The problem with Android fragmentation is that there are no clear lines of demarcation between types of phone. Whereas Apple makes is clear as to what is and what is not supported on the older phones.

      If multitasking is integral to the operation of the app, it will be listed as only compatible with the newer phones and touches.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    2. Re:Apple Market Fragmentation. by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      But if multitasking isn't "integral" but would be nice then the developer is still left with coding and testing two scenarios. That's fragmentation, although admittedly a little less than Android.

      --
      Nick
    3. Re:Apple Market Fragmentation. by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      But if multitasking isn't "integral" but would be nice then the developer is still left with coding and testing two scenarios. That's fragmentation, although admittedly a little less than Android.

      There are a lot of scenarios that you have to test for. For example, if your app can make use of location services, you have to test for now your app will react to location service being turned off or denied access by the user to location. Luckily, Apple provides API functions that you can call to make your life easier.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    4. Re:Apple Market Fragmentation. by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      And interestingly iPad runs an apparently older, forked version of the iPhone OS. I've been told that their APIs have actually diverged (!!) and that iPhone 4.0 won't be coming to iPad, with some merger possible in the 4.1 timeframe. Nuts!

  30. multitasking? No way by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd rather not have the ability to multitask on my iPhone. My battery can barely handle just listening to songs while at work, so forget about having 5 or 6 apps in the background receiving push notifications and constantly updating.

  31. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by sparky1240 · · Score: 1

    Technically, it's not multi-tasking anyway. It's really just application switching. And the 3Gs already does that ok (ie. I can have my music playing in the background whilst browsing the web).

  32. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by WilyCoder · · Score: 5, Informative

    Go ahead and jailbreak an iPhone 3g and try to run more than 2 apps at the same time. It slows to a CRAWL.

  33. Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry, but it is NOT true multitasking. Applications will have to be re-written to act like a service, then they will be "suspended" and enable quick application switching: http://www.precentral.net/apple-plays-its-multitasking-card-its-no-ace

    "What Apple is doing instead of 'true' multitasking is offering seven different OS-level services that apps can take advantage of in lieu of actually running in the background: audio, VOIP, location, push notifications, local notifications, task finishing, and fast app switching. To switch to a recently opened app, you double-tap the home button and a dock of your recent apps pops up"

    If you want to see real phone multitasking in action, and with a wonderful UI to go along with it/manage it, look at how Palm WebOS does it.

    1. Re:Not true multitasking by guspasho · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Unless your smartphone has more than one CPU core, your phone doesn't have TRUE multitasking either.

    2. Re:Not true multitasking by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      look at how Palm WebOS does it.

      The three-hour battery life part or the going bankrupt by catering to whims of tech forum trolls part?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    3. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but it is NOT true multitasking.

      So? What they're implementing will allow 99.9% of users to do everything they might want to do. Pandora will now play in the background. Skype will send you messages and keep you logged in throughout.

      If they implemented true multitasking, you then need to have a mechanism by which you explicitly close every application. Apple here is putting the burden on developers to implement the multitasking features users will want. The users benefit by not having to keep track of open applications at all. On the iphone hardware, true multitasking would only hurt battery life (further) and tax the fairly limited RAM.

      My only surprise was that the state-saving fast app switch wasn't already implemented. This is what the old Palm OS did, and it worked really nicely. I've long thought that all you need to tack onto that model is audio, messaging, and maintaining connections (e.g. VNC).

    4. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 3, Informative

      The number of CPU cores has absolute nothing to do with singletasking vs. multitasking. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_multitasking

    5. Re:Not true multitasking by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

      With hardware at 32nm now and going to 22nm soon, the dual core phone might present a game changing opportunity for someone.

    6. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is like complaining that a CVT doesn't count as an automatic transmission, because there are automatically shifted manual transmissions in the market.

      Instead of basing your requirement on implementation details, how bout considering use-cases instead. If there's something not covered, then you can complain about the gap in functionality instead.

    7. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      I agree that it might not be something that MOST people will need (TRUE multitasking), but it is very nice to have it. As far as a mechanism by which you explicitly close (or switch to) running applications, that is easy... You really need to go into YouTube and watch any of the zillion videos as to how it is handled in Palm WebOS (Pre or Pixi). It is a simple yet brilliant way to do it, and probably one of the best things about WebOS.

      You can run as many apps as you have RAM to handle them. Each has it's own "card" (window), and you can visually swipe between them. When a card loses focus, the OS will well the app that, and the app will either continue to run (which is the default state, and works with anything) or decide it wants to pause (like a game might do, since it requires interaction). Cards can be quickly swiped off the screen to close the app, reordered, or focused. You can leave your most-used apps "running" all the time.

      The only drawback is that it requires more RAM. Thankfully, newer devices get more and more :)

    8. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but it is NOT true multitasking. Applications will have to be re-written to act like a service, then they will be "suspended" and enable quick application switching: http://www.precentral.net/apple-plays-its-multitasking-card-its-no-ace

      "What Apple is doing instead of 'true' multitasking is offering seven different OS-level services that apps can take advantage of in lieu of actually running in the background: audio, VOIP, location, push notifications, local notifications, task finishing, and fast app switching. To switch to a recently opened app, you double-tap the home button and a dock of your recent apps pops up"

      If you want to see real phone multitasking in action, and with a wonderful UI to go along with it/manage it, look at how Palm WebOS does it.

      How many fucking apps do you need to run at one time? It's a goddamn phone!

    9. Re:Not true multitasking by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 1

      I'm sure Apple is dying to pattern their business after Palm.

    10. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > The three-hour battery life part

      You will have to do better than that. 1) Battery life has nothing to do with the topic 2) Welcome to fast smartphones 3) WebOs has been updated several times to significantly increase battery life 4) The Pre's battery life is on-par with the Droid 5) Unlike the iphone, at least you can easily swap the battery in the Pre/Pixi, and you can charge it instantly with magnetic induction on the touchstone.

      > or the going bankrupt by catering to whims of tech forum trolls part?

      Funny, I seem to remember a time when Apple was moving towards bankruptcy. The fact that they are having financial issues in a crowded market says little about the technology they offer. Again, has nothing to do with the topic of multitasking.

      Now... who is the troll?

    11. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really need to go into YouTube and watch any of the zillion videos as to how it is handled in Palm WebOS (Pre or Pixi).

      This is hardly a shining example of how to handle multitasking.

    12. Re:Not true multitasking by c_forq · · Score: 1

      I think the Apple solution is super smart when it comes to battery life, and I imagine it incorporates tech from OS-X's Grand Central Dispatch.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    13. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to read about what multitasking and multithreading are. Oh wait. You are probably an Apple fanboy who thinks he actually knows about computers.

    14. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      It *is* a shining example of *how* to handle multitasking. But it is NOT a shining example of the performance in that particular case or point in time. That video is of their low-end phone (Pixi non-plus) with a slower processor, before they doubled the RAM, and before several significant OS updates to address those issues. (WebOS had only been out about 5 months at the video shooting, maybe less). I assure you, on a Pre with updates, it is tremendously faster (even on an updated Pixi+). The concept of the way WebOS handles multitasking is right-on.

    15. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      On the surface it appears Apple's pseudo-multitasking would save battery life over true multitasking, but that is probably not the case. If you need to truly multitask and have more than one app actually doing something at the same time, then it will keep the CPU busier and use more battery. But having an app that CAN do something else at the same time doesn't mean it WILL do something... when it doesn't need to, it will sleep. And a sleeping 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc application will not add any additional drain to the system. And if they DO need to do something, well, that is the point of multitasking in the first place as opposed to just suspend-and-switch... you gotta give to get.

      And with the iphone model of suspend-and-switch, it might save memory, but the app isn't READY if you switch back and forth a lot (and on my phone, I do). Ironically, that will incur MORE CPU cycles than if the app were already loaded, running, and just sleeping when waiting for focus.

      The only problem with the WebOS model of true multitasking would be a poorly designed app that continues to do unnecessary work when it has no focus. I have yet to see such an app (and I have lots installed). Doesn't mean it can't happen, though.

    16. Re:Not true multitasking by Macka · · Score: 1

      Ok, I don't agree with the parent's view on this and have written as much elsewhere on this story so I don't care to repeat myself. But ...

      Unless your smartphone has more than one CPU core, your phone doesn't have TRUE multitasking either

      ... that is a load of bollocks. Computers have been multitasking on single cpus and single cpu cores for years before multi-core chips became the norm. Ok, with a single core only one task can be running at once, but that was why scheduling was invented: to enable a cpu to context switch between tasks at a speed that gives the user the illusion of multitasking. And that is the accepted definition/understanding of what multitasking means. Even with multiple cpus and multiples cpu cores, multitasking allows many more tasks to be run than there are CPUs . Last year I was responsible for maintaining one particular system with 4 single-core cpus running Oracle 10g that would peak at just over 1,000 simultaneous user connections each day. Now that is beautiful example of multitasking.

    17. Re:Not true multitasking by medcalf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From that description (I haven't seen the keynote or APIs yet), it sounds like Apple is using a publish/subscribe notifications feature to talk to system services for these seven tasks. That's actually both clever and useful, in that it allows the user to know that the backgrounded services are efficient (since Apple wrote them and are, pardon the pun, demons about performance on the phone) while still allowing the developer to easily use the most-requested services. And it would be trivial to extend with other services as they're seen to be needed.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    18. Re:Not true multitasking by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      True with the Pre you can listen to Pandora and run your company into bankruptcy at the same time. (sorry had to do it)

      But seriously the only difference I can see is that on the iPhone apps(other than mail) cant open other apps(other than Safari)(which seems like a good ideal to me). True you get an icon instead of the full screen preview but if you can't remember what you were doing in a program it probably shouldn't still be running.

    19. Re:Not true multitasking by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Again, has nothing to do with the topic of multitasking.Again, has nothing to do with the topic of multitasking.

      The point I'm making is that most of the multitasking debate is basically driven by bullet-point-ism that has no relation to what the market is actually demanding from their phones, and that having really really good multitasking doesn't have any effect on a phone's success or failure. You see here that Palm can build an awesome phone with all of these features people on the /. lurve ("javascript apps!," "'true' multitasking!", "isn't APPLE!" "isn't ATT!" "screws with iTunes!") and it's basically irrelevant when the phone features that actually matter are long battery life, ease of use and good reception.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    20. Re:Not true multitasking by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Funny, I seem to remember a time when Apple was moving towards bankruptcy.

      Yeah, they brought in someone with talent and actual vision for the company not just ape what the best competitors were doing and try to please everyone who didn't buy their product for whatever reason.

      Here though, Palm's just treading water until the inevitable happens and they go bankrupt. I was considering a Pre until their spat with Apple over iTunes syncing. I built a tiny app that I use to sync my iTunes library with my PSP *just to prove it can be done.* Using the publicly available XML and other such stuff.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    21. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Battery life has EVERYTHING to do with the topic. That is why Apple is not allowing "real" multitasking among apps. Also, the OS is already a multitasking OS. Just look at a crash dump when you are doing development and it tells you the names of all the other processes that were running.

      2) Seriously? Your answer is that we should like it or lump it? I like Apple's answer of giving me most of the same capabilities without the battery drain.

      3) & 4) Couldn't tell you if that is true or not. I don't know ANYBODY that has one, and my circle of friends are all techies.

      5) Great, so to get long battery life I can just carry an extra battery or two around. I'm glad you're not a hardware engineer.

      To me, the Palm Pre is the biggest case of "Nothing to see here folks...move along!" that I've seen in many years. Yawn!

    22. Re:Not true multitasking by Wovel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually the battery life part is key to doing proper (which is better than true) multi-tasking on mobile device. The GP is actually 100% correct.

      What really matters is functionality. What useful background process can you do on the Pre that can not be done on the iPhone. (I already know the answer, so you can just slip back into fantasyland where there are people in the world that are interested in WebOS devices).

    23. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >when the phone features that actually matter are long battery life, ease of use and good reception.

      Well, the Pre/WebOS has reasonable battery life (for a smart phone), is very easy to use, and has good reception. But your point about the basic functions of many modern phones getting lost in buzz words and obscure features (sometimes to the point of SACRIFICING basic functionality) is right on the mark.

    24. Re:Not true multitasking by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      and you can charge it instantly with magnetic induction on the touchstone.

      so I set it on the "touchstone" and it goes from 3% battery to 100% battery INSTANTLY? I highly doubt that.

      P.S. my iphone charges instantly, I simply set it on the dock and it charges. same as my Nokia N900 did when I plugged it in. and My Motorola Droid did...

      your blessed Palm phone is not special because it uses old induction charging tech from 1959. (electric razors and toothbrushes have used this forever it's not new, just a gimmick.)

      And yes battery life has everything to do with the topic. I really miss my once a week charge time with my Nokia N62... Todays smartphones, all of them are complete pieces of crap when it comes to the phone part. Yes even my iPhone.

      If a phone can not go 5 days without being charged, then the phone is an EPIC FAIL.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    25. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >so I set it on the "touchstone" and it goes from 3% battery to 100% battery INSTANTLY? I highly doubt that.

      That is not what I meant. I meant the effort to charge it (no cables, no connector, just slap it on there), not the time it takes to charge the battery. Sorry about that.

      >And yes battery life has everything to do with the topic.

      No it doesn't. See this message: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1612316&cid=31783436

    26. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >Actually the battery life part is key to doing proper (which is better than true) multi-tasking on mobile device. The GP is actually 100% correct.

      I would agree with you, but only if true multitasking used more battery... which it doesn't. See http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1612316&cid=31783436

    27. Re:Not true multitasking by earthbound+kid · · Score: 1

      "Funny, I seem to remember a time when Apple was moving towards bankruptcy."

      Yes, when they were lagging behind MS on the OS fundamentals side. (They did have better UI in some respects, but even there, it had a lot of shortcomings by the end of the OS 9 era, when MS had standardized the right click and scroll wheel and Apple was still figuring those things out.)

      So, you just contradicted your whole point there.

      Anyway, Palm's WebOS is definitely a strong competitor with Android and iPhone on the technical side, but on the business side, it looks like they'll be out of the market by the end of the year if not sooner. It's a shame, but so it goes.

    28. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woah. Woah. Woah.All very good points except for

      ...and you can charge it instantly with magnetic induction on the touchstone.

      The touchstone's charging speed isn't only not instant, but it's slow as balls. My friend had his pre running a wifi hot spot from 3G and being charged by the touchstone. And by charged I mean, he had the touchstone there to keep his battery from going down faster. That's right, it was absorbing more power than the "magnetic induction" could deliver.

    29. Re:Not true multitasking by exomondo · · Score: 1

      No it's still true multitasking, in the computing sense, since in the context of computers multitasking is not a hardware-level concept. What you are thinking of is parallel processing.

    30. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What really matters is functionality. What useful background process can you do on the Pre that can not be done on the iPhone. (I already know the answer, so you can just slip back into fantasyland where there are people in the world that are interested in WebOS devices).

      IM.

    31. Re:Not true multitasking by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      And it would be trivial to extend with other services as they're seen to be needed.

      The obvious problem with this arrangement is that Apple should not be in a position to decide for the developers (and thus also for the users) what services they might need. I know for sure that they won't ever get that right for what I need.

    32. Re:Not true multitasking by dangitman · · Score: 1

      That is not what I meant. I meant the effort to charge it (no cables, no connector, just slap it on there), not the time it takes to charge the battery.

      So, why didn't you say that, instead of saying it charges instantly? Not saying what you mean doesn't give you much credibility.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    33. Re:Not true multitasking by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Maybe because I am human and humans make mistakes sometimes? Was your reply to that really necessary??

    34. Re:Not true multitasking by rmav · · Score: 1

      What really matters is functionality. What useful background process can you do on the Pre that can not be done on the iPhone. (I already know the answer, so you can just slip back into fantasyland where there are people in the world that are interested in WebOS devices).

      IM.

      Beejive does IM on the iPhone (3.1.2 on a 3G) just fine, and I get the messages also when the app is closed. Try again.

      Roberto

    35. Re:Not true multitasking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a question:
      what use case would "true" multitasking allow that those services would not?

      It's not like the screen is big enough for two windows to be open at a time, so fast app switching is basicly the same as fast window switching. The audio and push notifications should handle the 3rd party music player, and chat notifications issues respectively.

  34. LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The Apple Hipster Douchebag Multitasking Roadmap

    > Multitasking sucks and is unneeded. I don't want stupid multitasking I just want to focus on one app at a time.

    > OMG!!! We are finally getting multitasking!!!

    > Apple's half-assed multitasking is 'pretty slick' Apple 'invented' multitasking

    1. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mac OS 9 and earlier only had "co operative" multitasking and Mac zealots of the day used to proclaim it was better than "true" multitasking and came up with all sorts of rationales for it, until OS X came along of course. So history is repeating itself and Apple is bringing back their "it's better because it's worse" philosophy of the 90's. LOL.

    2. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by WilyCoder · · Score: 1, Troll

      Nice straw man.

      I never said multitasking was unneeded. Nor did I ever said Apple invented multitasking.

      The anti-apple people like you are as bad as the 'hipster douchbags' you mentioned.

      Its a phone, get over it and go back to digg.

    3. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      I did A level computing (between ages 16 - 18 here in UK, before going to University) with a guy like that. The collage we went to was all Mac and so we spent our lessons coding in Pascal on iMacs (the originals, about when they first came out) in OS8.

      I'd be sarcastic and say having simple Pascal programmes cause the OS to hard lock was hilarious, but it's not worth it cos it really, really wasn't. The computer lab was designed with the power plugs within easy reach because the reset button on those iMacs was a PITA too.

      --
      Nick
    4. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Apple Hipster Douchebag Multitasking Roadmap

      > Multitasking sucks and is unneeded. I don't want stupid multitasking I just want to focus on one app at a time.

      > OMG!!! We are finally getting multitasking!!!

      > Apple's half-assed multitasking is 'pretty slick' Apple 'invented' multitasking

      I have an iPhone, I have also had several mobile phones from other manufacturers that also did not have Multi-tasking and I can't say I have ever missed it. Maybe if I was a chat junky I would but then why would I buy a telephone to run a Chat client on it?

    5. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

      The collage we went to was all Mac

      Was your collage best known as an art school? Perhaps one that taught students how to cut out pictures from magazines and glue them to paper?

    6. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, some Mac users still think it was better, but they're a very tiny minority.

      In reality, it was better at certain things, at least until Apple addressed those specific needs by adding certain features to the operating system, such as clever stuff in the kernel for controlling latency in audio applications, etc.

      More broadly, cooperative multitasking certainly has legitimate uses, but few of those are relevant to general purpose personal computing, let alone on modern high-performance hardware.

      I certainly looked forward to enforced preemption (at least crude preemptive multitasking was possible to varying degrees from the earliest days of the Macintosh operating system), but not as much as other features...

      The Classic Mac OS's big problem was much less cooperative versus preemptive multitasking, than it was the absence of protected memory. One poorly written program could, and they routinely did, stomp all over the rest of the system. As you'd expect, very ugly crashes were frequent in a desktop user environment. The old Mac OS could be stable in very limited circumstances, such as running a single carefully written application. I routinely ran various servers on Macs before OS X, and these could be totally stable for arbitrary periods of time running continuously sometimes for almost a year before power failures/hardware changes/software upgrades would inevitably force a reboot. This was, of course, the exception rather than the rule.

    7. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are indeed stupid macfans who will preach anything Apple feeds them with, usually they are the less tech-aware of the crowd. Most people thought multitasking in OS9 was crap, including me.

    8. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by slack_prad · · Score: 1

      why would I buy a telephone to run a Chat client on it?

      I don't know .. to chat maybe?

      --
      Sent from my desktop computer
    9. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      Mac OS 9 and earlier only had "co operative" multitasking and Mac zealots of the day used to proclaim it was better than "true" multitasking and came up with all sorts of rationales for it

      Like... it actually fulfilled the main need Mac users had for multitasking: i.e. having multiple apps running and being able to switch between them, without imposing the extra overhead of proper preemptive multitasking? Or that the main competition, Windows 95, only had half-baked multitasking anyway?

      Anyway, only the most rabid Mac zealots would deny that, by the end of the 90s, Mac OS 9 had passed its sell-by date.

      Uncomfortable truth: if you're running interactive applications, you don't need full multitasking. If you've got a system with limited CPU/RAM you don't want full multitasking.

      Multitasking on Windows Mobile: epic fail. Multitasking on Android: sorry folks, I actually use an Android phone and it grinds to a halt unless you use a third-party task killer app. Me, I don't want to miss phone calls because I've forgot to kill my GPS app (and it doesn't matter that the radio is independent - the phone UI still needs the main CPU).

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    10. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Mac OS 9 and earlier only had "co operative" multitasking and Mac zealots of the day used to proclaim it was better than "true" multitasking and came up with all sorts of rationales for it, until OS X came along of course.

      Fun fact: holding down the mouse button gave full CPU to the GUI. Our web design guy used a Mac (of course), and shared a few folders to us unglamorous Linux users. If you were copying a file off his machine, the transfer would sometimes freeze while he clicked and dragged stuff around on his desktop. This did not endear his chosen OS to the rest of us.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    11. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Fun fact: holding down the mouse button gave full CPU to the GUI.

      Same was true of the X Window System at the time. A fact which was discovered by a developer of hospital life support machine control software. (See comp.risks passim.)

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    12. Re:LOL! Apple Hipster Douchebag Fanboys by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      To the point that it locked out the network stack? Not saying it's impossible, but that seems pretty unlikely. Can you find a reference to it?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  35. Changed my mind. by mirix · · Score: 0, Troll

    I swore to never get an iPhone, but now that it supports ads... sign me up!
    This is what I've been waiting for. Apple is a true innovator.

    --
    Sent from my PDP-11
    1. Re:Changed my mind. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ads aren't anything new. There are already a lot of ad-supported free apps available. Also available are pay-for ad-free versions of the same software. Maybe if you would actually try using an iPhone instead of posting garbage, you'd know better. The only new thing is Apple creating its own ad network.

    2. Re:Changed my mind. by Wovel · · Score: 1

      It has always supported ads in thrid party apps, and this only provides an alternative source for developers. Every other smartphone with 3rd party apps also supports ads in apps, so I assume you have no intention of using any smartphone 3rd party apps.

      I also assume you will not be back to Slashdot.

  36. I'm not upgrading... by Jorgandar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'll be dumping iPhone as soon as my current jailbroken 3GS is considered obsolete. I shouldn't have to literally break the law to make my phone run and work how I, the USER, want it to. I can no longer tolerate Apples' insistence of controlling everything i do and censoring my content, as well as locking in the app marketplace so that THEY profit from every transaction, therefore forcing me to pay higher prices than i would otherwise in a completely free and open market. I'm switching to andriod rather than upgrading. I encourage everyone else to as well.

    1. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I shouldn't have to literally break the law to make my phone run and work how I, the USER, want it to.

      You, the USER, didn't buy an open source phone. You bought a phone with a specified platform and method of operation. Maybe you should back the bus up and ask why you, the USER, bought a phone you didn't like.

    2. Re:I'm not upgrading... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      First of all, you are voiding your warranty and forgoing any future support. What Apple objects to is people jailbreaking the iPhone to unlock apps so that they don't have to pay for them. Read for yourself.

      Second of all, the iPhone was known to be closed before you bought it so complaining that it is closed after you bought it is rather silly.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Kethinov · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm with you. I bought a 2G iPhone years ago because it was the only smartphone with a user experience I considered to be acceptable. When they launched the app store, I expected openness, but was sorely disappointed. I've been waiting ever since for Android to catch up and in my opinion it finally has. I'm going to switch to Android some time this summer. Currently exploring my options. The HTC Desire looks like the best so far.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    4. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Microlith · · Score: 1

      What Apple objects to is people jailbreaking the iPhone to unlock apps so that they don't have to pay for them.

      Apple is opposed to the proposed Class #1 exemption because it will destroy the
      technological protection of Apple's key copyrighted computer programs in the iPhone(TM) device
      itself and of copyrighted content owned by Apple that plays on the iPhone, resulting in copyright
      infringement, potential damage to the device and other potential harmful physical effects,
      adverse effects on the functioning of the device, and breach of contract.

      Basically, they're full of shit. If ANY of that were a real justification for denying an exemption for jailbreaking, then they would have implemented the EXACT SAME SYSTEM OF LOCKDOWN ON THE MAC. The only reason against it is to prevent users (and developers) from bypassing the app store should they choose to.

    5. Re:I'm not upgrading... by jo_ham · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why did you buy it then, and not an Android based phone? It clearly didn't do what you wanted it to do and you knew that before you bought it.

      I can't use a Corvette to move a sofa without extensive modification or strapping it to the roof in an unwieldy manner, but I don't whine about it.

    6. Re:I'm not upgrading... by CompressedAir · · Score: 1

      What is it you want to do that you cannot?

      Also, since when is jailbreaking an iPhone "breaking the law"? There are things you can do with a jailbroken iPhone that break the law, but there are things you can do with a stock one that break the law as well... for instance, hitting someone over the head with one.

    7. Re:I'm not upgrading... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      If you read the whole brief, Apple talks almost exclusively about Apps. You can say that's not the real reason but only Apple knows that. If you were a developer, would you like to see Apple protect your App or would you like any one to jailbreak the iPhone and put your app free on the internet for anyone to download.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    8. Re:I'm not upgrading... by mcsqueak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'll be dumping iPhone as soon as my current jailbroken 3GS is considered obsolete. I shouldn't have to literally break the law to make my phone run and work how I, the USER, want it to.

      No, clearly you purchased the wrong phone for what you need, and have some serious buyers remorse. Sort of like buying a minivan then wondering why it can't go fast enough to win any street races, if car analogies are your thing.

      I bought a 3GS last summer after it was released as well. It does everything that it advertised it was supposed to do, nothing more, nothing less. Since I bought it wanting those features, I am very happy with my purchase.

      No one is forcing you to break the law to make the phone run the way you think it should, rather you have to break the law because you failed to read the standard set of features/benefits that they 3GS had at the time of release. It's not like they kept what it could and couldn't do a secret.

    9. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll? Android didn't exist when first iPhone came around.

    10. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why did you buy it then, and not an Android based phone? It clearly didn't do what you wanted it to do and you knew that before you bought it.

      Because - how is he supposed to compensate for his tiny penis if he can't whinge on online forums?

    11. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Microlith · · Score: 1

      By that logic no one should publish software for the Mac, because someone could upload it. They should demand Apple implement a similar lockdown on the Mac.

      Again, if "defending Apps from piracy" is their defense against an exemption, the utter lack of such protections on the Mac shows their standpoint is totally irrational and contradictory. Thus the obvious and rational explanation is that it protects their bottom line by keeping the gates closed.

    12. Re:I'm not upgrading... by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Informative

      He says he has a 3GS - Android was definitely out by the time the 3GS was in stores. The HTC Dream was out in October 2008 (the first Android phone). The 3GS was released 6 months later.

      So, he bought a 3GS despite Android phones being available, and now he's moaning about "having to break the law" to use his phone the way he wants.

      Should have bought an Android phone.

    13. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off, hippie.

    14. Re:I'm not upgrading... by 517714 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I shouldn't have to literally break the law to make my phone run and work how I, the USER, want it to.

      You, the USER, didn't buy an open source phone. You bought a phone with a specified platform and method of operation. Maybe you should back the bus up and ask why you, the USER, bought a phone you didn't like.

      Or maybe ask why he, the USER, liked the phone so much he bought it without thinking it through, and how many times he will repeat this process. Does he really expect more cred because he bought one? More like I made a big mistake, my opinion should not be trusted on things technological.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    15. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Powerbear · · Score: 1

      Google releases a new operating system. You will be able to upgrade your new HTC Desire.

      ( ) They day it's released
      ( ) A few days after it's released
      ( ) A few months after it's released
      ( ) Never. HTC Makes money by selling you a new phone with a new operating system. They don't really have any incentive to upgrade an old phone with the latest features.

      Apple releases a new operating system. You will be able to upgrade your old phone.

      ( X ) The day it's released. Every feature may now be available, but if the hardware can handle it. It'll work.

    16. Re:I'm not upgrading... by hitmark · · Score: 1

      two device solution. One dumbphone for connectivity, One smart tablet for use.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    17. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      i'm not sure how this figures into the whole situation for the GP, but apple has been getting progressively more restrictive lately, no more wifi apps, no more adult content..

      He might have bought the phone with wifi-scraping and porn-apping high on the feature list (like some ps3 owners saw the otherOs as a very big reason to get it), and found himself getting shafted by apple again and again.

      I'm not saying this is a common case, apple will be smart enough to not piss off the majority of their user base, but there are bound to be cases like the one i described

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    18. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      Also, since when is jailbreaking an iPhone "breaking the law"? There are things you can do with a jailbroken iPhone that break the law, but there are things you can do with a stock one that break the law as well... for instance, hitting someone over the head with one.

      i'm guessing the good old DCMA might have something to say about jailbreaking... (which means you can get shafted bigtime if anyone comes after you)

      not an american though, so i dont know the details

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
    19. Re:I'm not upgrading... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      By that logic, a desktop computer is the same thing as a mobile phone. And all desktop software is the same as mobile software. There's no basic difference the two according to you.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    20. Re:I'm not upgrading... by mqduck · · Score: 1

      You can't be serious. You're not at all outraged that making the phone you bought work the way you want it to is AGAINST THE LAW?

      --
      Property is theft.
    21. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Kethinov · · Score: 1

      You make a good point. This has been a concern for me.

      However, it's been my understanding that it is reasonable for me to expect the Android community to make an unsupported build of OS updates available for my phone if I choose a relatively popular one.

      On top of that, I'm not terribly interested in OS upgrades anyway. Android already has the features I need whereas with Apple, every update has filled in a very substantial gap in my needs.

      Frankly though, my reason for ditching Apple isn't their OS upgrade policy. As you say, the competition isn't much better, if at all. I want to boycott their closed app store-only policy by voting with my dollars. I shouldn't need to break the law (by jailbreaking) to install applications from arbitrary sources.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    22. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I didn't know it was this limited when I bought it. I guess I could have done intensive research, but considering that every other phone had multitasking, I just assumed The IPhone did too. Stupid me. And of course I knew all about how they would change the OS and apps store to be more restrictive, Who wouldn't want that! Fine. I made a bad purchase. How do you explain the fact that Apple is actively trying to prevent people like me from jailbreaking it to do what I really want. I don't give a damn about "official" Apple support. How is this journey into Tyrancy justified?
            Btw, you can get multitasking with a Jailbroken phone. I don't find a problem with apps slowing down my phone. I suspect Apple has other reasons to restrict multitasking.

    23. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I shouldn't have to literally break the law to make my phone run and work how I, the USER, want it to.

      You, the USER, didn't buy an open source phone. You bought a phone with a specified platform and method of operation. Maybe you should back the bus up and ask why you, the USER, bought a phone you didn't like.

      I, the USER, bought a phone that was crap.
      &
      I, the USER, have a right to complain and have it fixed.

      Simple and no bus to back up.

    24. Re:I'm not upgrading... by Jorgandar · · Score: 1

      Are you some kind of moron? Nobody knew everything apple planned to do with their platform. YOU are looking at the situation with perfect 20/20 vision. Well news flash, asshole, reality isnt that way. You learn as you go. And since only today I can see what apple is up to, i choose not to support it. So therefore, YOU can just GO TO HELL.

  37. Big F U to Adobe (and others) by DA_MAN_DA_MYTH · · Score: 4, Informative

    In revised iPhone SDK License agreement:

    3.3.1 -- Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

    --
    "It takes many nails to build a crib, but one screw to fill it."
    1. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by jo_ham · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe if Adobe pulled its thumb out of its ass and made a decent implementation of flash for OS X then Apple would be more willing to throw them a bone on the iPhone OS.

    2. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let's not get too cynical. I watch hulu for a few hours on a dual core desktop computer and the video becomes sluggish. Imaging flash hugging the cpu during a 911 call.

    3. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Uh, I guess you cannot use a game engine then. Right?

    4. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by auLucifer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're exactly right, if the engine isn't written in C/C++/Objective-C. Wait a minute, I think they typically are! Fancy that, I think they'll be fine.

      --
      If I was witty I'd put something funny here but, as it stands, I am not and have just wasted seconds of your life
    5. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      um dude....its always said that!
      And by private APIs they mean undocumented Apple APIs. As long as an engine or framework fallows the guidelines its inclusion is fine also.

    6. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by mswhippingboy · · Score: 1

      Apple would be more willing to throw them a bone on the iPhone OS.

      Don't bank on it. Flash performance is Apple's excuse to not allow it. I'm sure the real reason has more to do with iJobs OCD and his need to control everything.

      --
      Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
    7. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by jrumney · · Score: 1

      An interesting tactic for companies affected by this would be to start pointing out the popular games and apps that break this condition and demand that Apple apply its T&Cs consistently and take them down. It would suck for the developers caught in the middle, but pretty soon Apple would start feeling the pain too - from the developer backlash, and from the loss of sales.

    8. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine

      Hmm, I'm not familiar with iPhone development (I've only explored the development environment for Android). How does Javascript development work on the iPhone for local apps?

      There's actually a javascript tool called FightCard (http://d20.heardworld.com/?page_id=589) which you download and run locally on your computer. Is it possible to run such a thing on an iPad? Doing initiative tracking for Shadowrun and D&D is really the killer app I've been looking for for an iPad, but I don't know if such a thing is even possible in the iPad's closed environment.

    9. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      By that logic, the Flash plugin and Java VM are written in C/C++ as well. In a lot of games the game logic is written in a scripting language, or other interpreted/byte compiled language. Ever heard of UnrealScript? Unity game engine C# (using Mono) or Javascript? Or even OpenGL ES 2.0 shaders? Are those C/C++/Objective-C? Nope.

    10. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by Homburg · · Score: 1

      Typically, but not always.

    11. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Imaging flash hugging the cpu during a 911 call.

      I just got this crazy mental image of the superhero in the red jumpsuit embracing a giant computer chip....

    12. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by am+2k · · Score: 1

      Interpreters were prohibited from day 1 anyways. Unity cross-compiles their C#-code to Objective-C and lets Xcode compile that for the iPhone, so it's questionable whether that's still in the bounds of this contract.

      Shaders don't link against the APIs, so they aren't a problem.

    13. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So no more Unity? whoa...

    14. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by SkipRosebaugh · · Score: 1

      Yes, you can download and run javascript based apps offline on the iPhone and iPad.

    15. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      What is the process for doing that? Does it load through iTunes or do you mount the device as a drive and just copy the files over?

      Sorry for sounding like a newb, but I don't use closed devices very much.

    16. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by nobodyman · · Score: 3, Informative

      um dude....its always said that!

      Not so. Here's section 3.3.1 of the iPhone OS3 license agreement:

      3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs.

      And here's 3.3.1 for iPhone OS4:

      3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs. Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited).

      They explicitly say that -- even if you are using documented api's -- you may not use any language other than c, obj-c, or c++ to do it.

    17. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by makomk · · Score: 2, Informative

      The new agreement doesn't just require that the application be written entirely in C/C++/Objective-C. It also requires that you access the iPhone APIs directly without using any cross-platform portability layer. Any game engine that runs on more than one platform or is designed to be able to is going to violate this.

    18. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by myspys · · Score: 1

      Or Corona (http://anscamobile.com/corona/)

      Was that really the intention of Apple, to get rid of all the "translators"? ie Lua -> ObjC

    19. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by MK_CSGuy · · Score: 1

      Seems to me like a big problem for MonoTouch too :(
      It is a commercial project based on Mono for compiling C# code into native iPhone code.
      It's a shame how the programming languages eco-system for the iPhone is so small.
      While a good programmer can program well with any language, I would still rather program in C#/Python/Java than Objective-C.

    20. Re:Big F U to Adobe (and others) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and how praytell will this prevent somebody from writing a c# to objective c translator (similar to vala)
      all you have to do is map the c# api calls to iphone sdk calls. apple doesn't have to know your entire workflow

  38. RAM, ipad by proxima · · Score: 5, Informative

    The older iphones and ipod touches don't get multitasking likely because they only have 128 MB of RAM.

    I was disappointed to find out the ipad only has 256 (same as the 3GS). RAM is cheap, and there's no lack of space inside the ipad for an extra chip. With the way Safari currently works, it starts dumping web page caches as memory fills up. That means going to another "tab" (through an expose-like interface) can often mean re-loading the page from scratch, in practice. Word is the iphone 3GS does this a lot less, so it's definitely something they need to address for the ipad. Because the expose is two taps instead of the one required for tabs, and because of this reloading, I find myself using substantially fewer open browser windows on the ipad than on a desktop.

    I'm starting to think they need to use part of the flash memory to cache things, especially with multitasking (that's what the "fast app switching" I presume does - save the full state of app memory on flash). The biggest downside to this is it wears down the flash.

    I was a little disappointed to find out that the ipad release will be "fall". So far, though, the only time I've really wanted multitasking (or some pseudo-multitasking) is to play audio from Pandora or Magnatune while doing other tasks (and you can use the Magnatune website to stream since Safari's media player multitasks). Most of the other features are really for iphone users (ibook app, improved mail - though unified inbox will be nice).

    By the way, anyone looking for an extremely thorough review of the ipad should look here. I have no relation to the author, but I found he covered things extremely well.

    --
    "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    1. Re:RAM, ipad by mirix · · Score: 1

      The older iphones and ipod touches don't get multitasking likely because they only have 128 MB of RAM.

      I think that's a bit of a stretch. For example, the older Nokia tablets (770, n800) had 64 and 128MB of RAM, respectively, and they had full blown multitasking. Not to mention slower processor than the iPhone. (770 and N800 had a 250 and 400MHz ARM, respectively).

      Besides, you can run a full blown OS like win2k alright with 128MB of RAM. Not speedy, but, it ran alright for the time.

      --
      Sent from my PDP-11
    2. Re:RAM, ipad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The older iphones and ipod touches don't get multitasking likely because they only have 128 MB of RAM.

      Damn, that's only 500 times as much RAM as an Amiga 1000. No way anyone can multitask in that!

    3. Re:RAM, ipad by proxima · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think that's a bit of a stretch. For example, the older Nokia tablets (770, n800) had 64 and 128MB of RAM, respectively, and they had full blown multitasking. Not to mention slower processor than the iPhone. (770 and N800 had a 250 and 400MHz ARM, respectively).

      Sure, lots of older computers had far less than 128 MB of RAM and did real multitasking. The issue is whether iphone OS and its apps on the earlier generations of hardware work well enough. You can bet they tested its performance. I suspect they found it quite lacking due to RAM and decided to disable multitasking rather than allow it and have it run poorly. More cynical people would say they're doing it to encourage upgrades.

      --
      "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    4. Re:RAM, ipad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mobile ram is not cheap, adding more hurts battery life and take up more board space. People are spoiled by the anomaly of gross oversupply of RAM in 2009 that caused desktop ram to be sold below cost for an extended period of time.

    5. Re:RAM, ipad by my_breath_smells · · Score: 5, Informative

      RAM is cheap, and there's no lack of space inside the ipad for an extra chip.

      The iPad's A4 processor has the RAM inside the A4 package using package-on-package technology. Perhaps the RAM inside the A4 could have been a higher density, but space inside the iPad is not relevant.

      Integrating the RAM minimizes the pinout of the A4 and may have allowed them to avoid a difficult-to-breakout BGA pitch. (Changing from a 0.5mm to 0.4mm pitch allows more pins but complicates PCB routing and PCB expense.) I can't tell from this shot of the A4 what pitch is used, but the pin count is pretty high. Note: You need the blank areas in order to breakout traces and place vias.

    6. Re:RAM, ipad by auLucifer · · Score: 1

      The big difference with PC's is they have virtual memory, the iPhone OS so far doesn't. I don't know about the Nokia tablets but after playing with one years ago I would assume (possibly incorrectly in this case) that it uses virtual memory to bridge the gap, it's based on linux after all. I'd rather a responsive app that has my attention and swap between apps quickly then use multiple that all run slowly.

      --
      If I was witty I'd put something funny here but, as it stands, I am not and have just wasted seconds of your life
    7. Re:RAM, ipad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The best part is, running apps in the background on the older models has been possible since 2007 through a jailbroken app called Backgrounder, and there's even supplementary software like ProSwitcher that lets you have WebOS-style cards to boot, all in a paltry 128MB of RAM. RAM clearly isn't the issue - it's a clear case of Apple trying to force people to upgrade.

    8. Re:RAM, ipad by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes and my Pentium 3 with 128 megs of RAM years ago had one thing that my iPhone doesn't.

      A stonking huge hard drive for virtual memory and an always on PSU.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    9. Re:RAM, ipad by vijayiyer · · Score: 1

      Wow, an intelligent post that understands there really are system level tradeoffs other than "control" and other nebulous but nevertheless impressive sounding reasons.
      Expect to get modded down shortly.

    10. Re:RAM, ipad by proxima · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The iPad's A4 processor has the RAM inside the A4 package using package-on-package technology. Perhaps the RAM inside the A4 could have been a higher density, but space inside the iPad is not relevant.

      Sure, but that's the route Apple decided to go. Yes, it probably saves cost and battery life to some extent (especially if that design is easily carried over into the next iphone). The ipad is basically a very fast cell phone with a great screen and huge battery.

      The ipad is fast for most things now, but my early web-browsing and PDF-viewing experience suggests that RAM is at a premium on this device. Adding any kind of multitasking only makes that worse.

      --
      "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    11. Re:RAM, ipad by proxima · · Score: 1

      The best part is, running apps in the background on the older models has been possible since 2007 through a jailbroken app called Backgrounder, and there's even supplementary software like ProSwitcher that lets you have WebOS-style cards to boot, all in a paltry 128MB of RAM. RAM clearly isn't the issue - it's a clear case of Apple trying to force people to upgrade.

      Others have reported here that using Backgrounder much on older iphones doesn't work well.

      --
      "The universe seems neither benign nor hostile, merely indifferent." --Carl Sagan
    12. Re:RAM, ipad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first and second generation devices: iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPod touch, iPod touch 2G all have 128MB of RAM. So older devices (first-gen iPhone and iPod) won't get iPhoneOS 4.0 for lack of computing power or memory bandwidth, but not for lack of memory size.

    13. Re:RAM, ipad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe there's some sort of limitation to memory size as the memchip is part of the CPU soldered directly above it.

    14. Re:RAM, ipad by drerwk · · Score: 1

      I've looked for an ARM device with more than 256meg ram. I think I only found one. So I wonder if the arm cores in general have a limited number of adress lines.

    15. Re:RAM, ipad by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      The Nexus One has 512MB, and of course a ARM-based snapdragon. Many other current ARM Android phones have 512MB+.

  39. Most important: restriction on app development by VZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Interestingly enough nobody seems to have mentioned this gem yet. To summarize, Apple has decided to forbid

    Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool

    While this is clearly aimed squarely at Adobe and their Flash compiler I can't help wondering what does it mean even for C++ libraries such as Qt or wxWidgets (that I'm personally most interested in) as, with a bit of bad faith (that Apple doesn't seem to luck), they could be construed to be "intermediary compatibility layers" too. And this definitely seems to exclude using Perl, Python, Ruby or anything else.

    If anybody had any doubts about Apple openness, this should hopefully be enough to dispel them (although whom am I kidding... there will surely be people able to justify this as well).

    1. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by mozumder · · Score: 1

      No one's NOT doubting Apple's openness.

      The question is, if their closed system is good or bad.

      I say it's good... their system helps keeps out crap developers.

    2. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because only great devs can write flashlight and fart apps?

      The reality is you can write good or bad code in any language. Their closed system is all about them keeping control. It does NOTHING to keep out "crap" developers (as completely shown by the amount of complete and utter "crap" already on the App Store).

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    3. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Kenja · · Score: 1

      So the thousands of fart sound effect generators are from 'good' developers and Adobe and others are 'crap' because they dont want to follow Apples draconian guidelines.

      Kay,

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    4. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      My question is, 'why?' Why does it bother Apple?

      In any case the obvious workaround is to make something that compiles directly into Objective-C, instead of assembly. You could even keep all the comments. This would be doable in Perl or C++ (for wxWidgets), I don't know if it would work in Flash.

      --
      Qxe4
    5. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

      You write bad code in C and it will have logic errors, leak memory, be inconsistent, or just crash. If the code base is big enough, no sane person can keep it going.

    6. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by VZ · · Score: 1

      My question is, 'why?' Why does it bother Apple?

      I won't speculate on this but, in spite of what the reply above seems to imply, I doubt it's out of concern for the users.

      In any case the obvious workaround is to make something that compiles directly into Objective-C, instead of assembly. You could even keep all the comments. This would be doable in Perl or C++ (for wxWidgets), I don't know if it would work in Flash.

      It might be doable but it would definitely count as the use of "intermediary translation ... tool" and so be clearly forbidden. Now in practice I don't think Apple is going to carefully examine all apps to check whether they do it and I'm not even certain that wxWidgets falls into this category anyhow. Unfortunately being uncertain that it does not is quite enough to dissuade anybody from even considering it. And this is even better than FUD because while there certainly is fear and uncertainty, there is no doubt whatsoever that Apple won't hesitate to prohibit any "portable cross-platform C++ frameworks" if it ever decides it would be beneficial to it.

      You've got to admire Apple even if you find what they do as hateful as I do. They do know how to play the game and their progressive developer lock-in works better than anything Microsoft ever dreamt about (but now they will try to copy Apple, of course -- initially with lesser success but sooner or later they will get there too). And if all this evokes herds of lemmings to me this is surely just my own personal problem...

    7. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by cheesybagel · · Score: 1
      I say it's good... their system helps keeps out crap developers.

      You haven't tried enough applications I guess.

    8. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by exomondo · · Score: 1

      their system helps keeps out crap developers.

      Yeah thank god we have Apple making sure we get such great developers creating apps like iFart.

    9. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by UndyingShadow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, this is a sneaky underhanded move from Apple, and despite good points (The flash compiler is a piece of shit and/or Adobe blows!) it still reeks of them throwing their weight around as the dominant smartphone platform to try to hurt Adobe. This is why, even though I love the changes iPhone OS 4.0 gives us, I'm probably done with the iPhone as soon as my 3GS dies. It's taken 3+ years to get access to features that have been possible since months after the platform came out (Jailbreaking), and we're still subject to the whims of Apple. If Adobe was really serious, they'd eliminate support for all their Software on all Apple platforms. We can only hope that they do, which in a perfect world, would eliminate Flash as a dominant standard AND take Apple down a peg or two. One can hope.

    10. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If anybody had any doubts about Apple openness, this should hopefully be enough to dispel them (although whom am I kidding... there will surely be people able to justify this as well).

      You don't have to justify what you don't care about. I'll probably get modded troll, but the reality is most users don't want to tinker with their phone, most users are happy with the app store. I'm sorry, but technical users like you and I are in the minority. That isn't a real problem, being in the minority, but what is a problem is that it seems like no one in open source gets that not everybody prioritizes things like we do, and so we have conversaions like this:

      Guy: Why should I care about Linux.
      You: It works great and it's open!
      Guy: Open? What do you mean?
      You: Well you can make it do anything, or change it!
      Guy: Oh, well, okay, it's free then? I don't have to pay anything?
      You: Yeah!
      Guy: *looks at interface* man, a lot of these apps are hard to use :/
      You: No, you're just being ignorant, it's just really different see, it works great, I think it's easy to use, so will you, you just have to learn how to tweak it all!
      Guy: I don't have time for that
      Apple: Hey, our stuff is super intuitive guy!
      You: But it's not open!
      Guy: Well, I don't do anything that requires it to be open.
      You: But-But!

      When we start realizing we need to design for the people that use the software, and not ourselves, we'll see wider acceptance, like what companies do. And maybe that's a problem in the incentive structure - maybe because we generally aren't paid to develop stuff for open platforms, the UI isn't intuitive because we make it for us, we're not paid to make it for someone else.

      Well, those are my thoughts, and why Apple doesn't even HAVE to justify what they're doing.

    11. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by TRRosen · · Score: 1

      Read as "Native code only please" not really a big deal

    12. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by imnotanumber · · Score: 1

      It seems that the control freaks at Apple are out of control...

    13. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Right because it's in Adobe's best interest to no longer support Photoshop or Illustrator or Acrobat or Audition or Premiere on Mac? Granted, Aperture, Light Room, Garage Band and Final Cut all exist from Apple, but, I'm willing to bet the most hardcore Photoshop or Illustrator houses are Mac, not Windows.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    14. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by dalesmatrix · · Score: 1

      RunRev mobile can't be overjoyed with this little piece of news, fingers crossed they alter this policy.

    15. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Adobe hurts themselves. The only tolerable implementation of flash is on Windows.

    16. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does Nintendo allow you to develop for the DSi in any language you want? How much does it cost to become a DSi developer? How much does it cost to develop for the iPad?

      Look around and you might see how open Apple really is.

    17. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      80% of the app store disagrees with you.

      MOST of the apps for the iPhone are utter crap. absolute and utter crap. in fact it's hard to wade through all the crap because it seems that almost everything is 3 stars and very few get rated up and near none get rated down.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except Objective-C++ is supported, which supports C++, and you can use any intermediate frameworks you like as long as you're the one talking to the iPhone yourself and aren't avoiding their APIs directly.

      But you know, just ignore that and spread FUD, whatever.

    19. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      funny how apple users used to go on about how great their machines were at running photoshop, which hasn't been true for some time -like most things its much faster on the pc

      anyhow, we don't live in a perfect world - if we did then cocksuckers like you wouldn't exist, and the money you get from your folks to buy crap from jobs would probably be spent on something a bit more worthwhile.

    20. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One interesting aspect is the timing. Why announce the restriction just before the CS5 launch, when it had been public for months that this 'Flash iApp' was coming? Don't know if they just want Adobe to waste millions of dollars, or if the relationship is as bad as that with Google and they see Adobe as the 'enemy' now.

      They could have let others know they were planning this and generate some goodwill. Hey MonoTouch and Flash teams - we're going to mess up your business plans in a few months, so why flush your time and money down the can? Maybe you could spend the time on something we'd allow iPad users to enjoy, make it a better platform, keep your jobs, blah blah.

    21. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 1

      the really special kick in the arse for Adobe is the way that Apple let them develop this system, test it, talk about it, spend cash on it and get it right to the point of release before responding with a simple

      NO.

      It's a really vicious message: Don't try to push things. There is no way for you to know if you are wasting your money until you have already wasted it.

    22. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by angularbanjo · · Score: 0

      I guess those peeps who were looking at Ruby, Lua, etc. as alternatives to ObjC will have to wait to see whether Adobe's legalistas can turn this around. While I don't want to see ported Flash apps particularly this is definitely the closing of a freedom of choice on the platform.

    23. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Really? So if I implement a messy but syntactically correct bubble sort on 100,000 records instead of doing a quick-sort then the program will just bomb?

      Trust me, there's a lot of ways to write "bad code" that don't involve actual errors. Heck when I was still doing coursework the most common thing I saw from other students was not erroneous code, but rather code that completely missed the obviously elegant way to solve a problem, instead relying on weird hodgepodges that WORKED just fine, but were often slow and very hard to understand if you read over the code.

      Bad code exists in EVERY language.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    24. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by Lars+T. · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While this is clearly aimed squarely at Adobe and their Flash compiler

      So all they have to do is output C code instead of finished apps - ohh, wait, Apple is forcing Adobe to be more open.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    25. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This is Apple's store. You are Apple's bitch.

      And the thing that I'm getting about all of this is that a lot of developers have truly woken up to this fact over this issue. They've realised that you can't just look at the app store and say "as long as I don't do x or y that I'll be OK". Apple can simply change the rules and screw your whole business.

      It's like when some countries in Africa used to nationalise land or businesses. In effect, people's property got stolen by the government. The result? Well, no-one started any businesses because the risk of it getting stolen was factored in and people didn't put their money there.

    26. Re:Most important: restriction on app development by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 1

      I'll stretch the analogy here -

      in this case, the only rich country is Africa. Sure, they might take your business - but it is by far the best place to do business.

      yes - I make most of my living from the apple store
      yes - I have developed an app (with significant effort and money spent on development) and been told by Apple that it breaks no rules, but is not welcome nonetheless

      as you say. In the apple store, you are apple's bitch.

  40. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoops, you were specifically referring to multitasking and I was thinking OS 4.0 compatibility. Yeah, 3GS and newer only for multitasking. Sorry 'bout that.

  41. Give me ads! Yes! Tons of ads! Lots of ads! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great. Just what I've always wanted. Someone to interrupt my enjoyment of useless advertising with actual content.

  42. SSL-based VPN? by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    So...does that mean we'll finally see OpenVPN support?

    1. Re:SSL-based VPN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, it doesn't fall under one of the 7 categories.

  43. This will be a great boost for HTML5 by dingen · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Since the ads in iAd will be created in HTML5, this will help greatly in making this technology mainstream. Awesome!

    --
    Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    1. Re:This will be a great boost for HTML5 by WilyCoder · · Score: 1

      I hate ads, but I agree that this is a good move to get developers into HTML5...

    2. Re:This will be a great boost for HTML5 by FireofEvil · · Score: 1

      You mean get developers into fullscreen tags?

  44. Obsolete in two years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a 16GB ipod touch from late 2007 and will not be able to run this. Just like apple dropped PowerPC in snowleopard.

    Apple, where 2015 is obsolete today.

  45. "Internally shitting bricks" by dogNamedMerlin · · Score: 1

    ...sounds so awful. Great choice of words :-D!

  46. Thank you for keeping it to a sane level ... by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

    Thank you for not spamming

    the

    front

    page

    with

    every

    single

    update

    from the Apple event. Unlike certain other unnamed and unashamed websites out there, who feel they need to make a new article just to tell us that Jobs went to the bathroom and came back with slightly moist hands.

  47. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by robmv · · Score: 1

    Apple want people to upgrade to the 3GS, then they will announce 3GS2, double charge for you

  48. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    Probably because any intermediary code is going to invariably break with OS and API updates if wrappers and metaframeworks are used.

    I can't code in C++ on Android, which forces Java(not a bad language by any means, but, not native either), so big deal?

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  49. Scooped! by CoffeeDog · · Score: 1

    Damn just as I submit that addendum about the changes to the SDK, it gets tacked on here! Seriously, I hope developers start to second guess their future with Apple and start looking to more open pastures. Also the fact that the iPhone 3G still won't be able to multitask is getting commonly overlooked in the roar of Apple cultists collectively orgasming over a feature everyone else has had for eons. I may just stick with my jailbroken 3.1.2 until my contract is up and I get a shiny new Android phone.

    1. Re:Scooped! by codepunk · · Score: 1

      Seriously, I hope developers start to second guess their future with Apple and start looking to more open pastures.

      Ok I thought about it? Nope

      --


      Got Code?
    2. Re:Scooped! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wasn't a developer for the iphone before, but I just dropped the $99 to become one.

  50. Flash and iPhone OS by tlhIngan · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't see how the user agreement change prevents Flash apps from being recompiled into native ones.

    It says to only use documented (public) APIs. I would assume that the runtime and compiler do this, no? Or does the flash to native compiler already use private APIs?

    When you get down to it, you can code in assembly, C, C++, or other languages that compile against ARM and the libs Apple provides...

    1. Re:Flash and iPhone OS by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I accidentally copied only the beginning portion. If you read the linked article it goes into detail about the ban.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  51. "multitasking" will work OK no need of a TaskMan by u01iz · · Score: 1

    Flame Proof Comment:
    [To all fellow commenters who will ask for a "Task Manager"]

    As only a few mentioned in various forums already, there is no need for a task manager simply because each time you switch apps, the current app will be closed-killed-terminated the same way now happens.

    Why most are confused, thus the endless discussions, is because the proposed method of "multitasking" appears not to have achieved much things in other platforms, like Android for instance where a task manager occasionally feels handy(for me too).

    However, you forget the most significant thing in Apple's case.. The corporate fascism in Palo Alto does not approve apps which in any way will risk its regime. This, also(among others), includes bad developed apps which in sequence is in favor of satisfied customers.
    Exposing only 7 services tightly controlled are not enough to cover devs needs for versatility, but ensures(as much as possible) unproblematic behavior.

    In Android's case however, not only tight restrictions not apply, but services made by devs are allowed, so hangs, hogs and hiccups are inevitable.

    So, what we have here are two opposite fields which have gone black or white.

    The Apple "multitasking" will work OK because relies on best practice and tight control, BUT... too little too late.

    You will not need a Task Manager as long as Steve Jobs is the king of the hill.

    PS (to whoever agrees with the aforementioned): the number/amount of "background" applications(in reality closed-killed-terminated) which will appear when you double press the home button, is from trivial to whatever Apple decides for the best of the majority of their customers.

  52. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by whterbt · · Score: 1

    Either you didn't read the parent, or the content of the link you pasted. Try again. No multitasking on anything older than a 3GS.

    --
    Too late to be known as Bush the First, he's sure to be known as Bush the Worst.
  53. Wrong quote from the user agreement by daffmeister · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Looks like Adobe's release of CS5 with the Flash-to-native compiler has been nixed by Apple's new user agreement: '3.3.1 — Applications may only use Documented APIs in the manner prescribed by Apple and must not use or call any private APIs.'"

    That's the old agreement. The new agreement adds:

    "Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited)."

    That's the bit that nixes Flash.

    1. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by dingen · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That excludes a lot of iPhone frameworks out there (Unity, Corona, you name it). I'm sure that can't be what Apple means by that statement.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      Or SQLite. Or Lua. Or a zillion other languages.

    3. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by TRRosen · · Score: 0

      Nothing prevents a Flash to native compiler from being used. As long as it is a flash to NATIVE compiler and not a Flash interpreter or computability layer.

      Oh yes I forgot how dare evil Apple expect that iPhone apps actually be written for the iPhone?

      Oh I remember PORTED CODE SUCKS!

    4. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes there is. You would typically feed a Flash to Native compiler an Actionscript source file, which is not allowed.

    5. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine, and only code written in C, C++, and Objective-C may compile and directly link against the Documented APIs (e.g., Applications that link to Documented APIs through an intermediary translation or compatibility layer or tool are prohibited)."

      Wow, just... wow. Apple has historically been not friendly to third-party developers since iPhone release, but this sinks it down to an entirely new level.

      So, let me see. First, this obviously kills off any attempt to use any language other than C, C++ and ObjC for iPhone app development. We're not just talking about Flash here - compiling to C has historically been a popular cheap way to bootstrap a language, and many stick with it after getting it running - e.g. ISE Eiffel is a mature development tool that "compiles" to C.

      The whole bit about "translation or compatibility layer" is also very broad. From the sound of it, this would definitely prohibit any attempt to develop a cross-platform framework that'd let you build an application for iPhone as well as other platforms from a single codebase (like e.g. Qt lets you do on the desktop today), whether third-party or developed in-house.

      In fact, it sounds like it could also stretch far enough to prohibit any framework that wraps iPhone APIs, period - say, if someone came up with a C++ wrapper for ObjC classes for those of us who dislike square brackets - this might just restrict that kind of thing.

      Between that, and the underwhelming WP7 announcement, I'm very glad that I've bought a Nexus One.

    6. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      next version of iphone sdk agreement:
      "The developers are required to not have sex with multiple partners and to not use google or adobe or microsoft (insert every company that the master does not like) for anything in their life ever"

    7. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by ockegheim · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here's Corona's view on this issue. I hope they're right.

      --
      I’m old enough to remember 16K of memory being described as “whopping”
    8. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by oji-sama · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That excludes a lot of iPhone frameworks out there (Unity, Corona, you name it). I'm sure that can't be what Apple means by that statement.

      I'm sure that depend whether or not Apple likes the application in question...

      --
      It is what it is.
    9. Re:Wrong quote from the user agreement by makomk · · Score: 1

      Nothing prevents a Flash to native compiler from being used. As long as it is a flash to NATIVE compiler and not a Flash interpreter or computability layer.

      Yes it does. Try actually reading what you're replying to. The new agreement doesn't just require native code - it requires that native code be written in C, Objective C, or C++. Even translating the Flash code to C/Objective C and then compiling that is forbidden; compiling Flash to native code is right out. (Remember that the Flash-based development tools for the iPhone compile to native code already.)

  54. Aww, Teh Liddle Apple Troll Is Trying To Talk Shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    What's that faggot? Didn't bother to read the latest cellphone marketshare numbers? Apple down in marketshare, Android more than doubling its marketshare.

    That's right you piece of shit. Keep running your mouth off while Android continues to rock your Apple Hipster Douchebag world.

    Go cry over your Starbucks loser.

  55. Oh! by jbb999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Will it let you install your own applications on it however you like? No? Well it's still an essentially useless toy then.

    1. Re:Oh! by k2enemy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Will it let you install your own applications on it however you like?
      No?
      Well it's still an essentially useless toy then.

      Care to elaborate? I find my iPhone very useful.

    2. Re:Oh! by troc · · Score: 1

      An essentially useless toy?

      I beg to differ. It might not be an open, do what you like with me, free OS, linuxxxy hippiephone but that doesn't make it in any way useless or a toy.

      --
      Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
    3. Re:Oh! by cbreak · · Score: 1

      Just because you lack the mental capacity to use it that doesn't mean no one on this planet can.

    4. Re:Oh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Useless toy? Actually my locked down closed platform iPhone is the most useful computing device I have ever owned.

    5. Re:Oh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i suspect that you're not exactly a power user though, petal. though the shiny icons are lovely, it has to be said.
      (dammit when will that skinny creep jobs die, along with his control-mad company, i have a bottle of champers waiting on ice)

  56. iPhone 4.0 is great if you hate freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think iPhone OS 4.0:

    * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

    Hahah no, no no no, you can't just run the program, you need permission. If you have permission it can be taken away. If running it means you compete with apple you can't run it.

    * The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish (freedom 1).

    No and if you study apple software and use the same calls they will ban you and you can't run your software.

    * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2)

    Nope, not even as a developer you cannot do this. There are a limited number of copies you can give out and then it needs to be app store approved before you share anymore.

    * The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3)

    How the hell is anyone going to manage to do this one without jailbreaking?

    Now imagine writing software for windows:

    * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).

    Pretty much true.

    * The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish (freedom 1).

    You can study OSS code and you can make programs that make MS-only calls. You can't study too much of windows, you could get a license but it isn't the same. At least no one stops you from sharing your program or its code and vice versa.

    * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2)

    I can't redistribute windows or MS products, but I can redistribute my own code to others. MS isn't getting in the way there.

    * The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3)

    If it is FLOSS software then yes. Windows no. Some MS products yes/no. But generally as a programmer I can restribute my work on windows. No limitations here.

    So what do we conclude? Microsoft has to learn from Apple, MS simply doesn't hate freedom enough.

  57. Wow - multitasking! Like, er, Symbian or Maemo? by thaig · · Score: 1

    I am definitely biased but the point to note is that the iPhone didn't have multitasking until now unlike smartphone OSes out there that have had it since the late 1990s.

    Whether it matters or not is the question . . .

    --
    This is all just my personal opinion.
    1. Re:Wow - multitasking! Like, er, Symbian or Maemo? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Yup. Apple's phone is definitely getting to the point where it's almost modern.

      Now, if they can just figure out how to use Bluetooth to transfer files, they'll have a winner.

  58. Re:well, sorta by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

    And I'll guarantee that their multitasking implementation will be the best too. You won't need one of those apps that are popular on Android to kill off the background processes, cause Apple's implementation won't be careless and lazy the way Android's is.

    I'm not even so sure that Android users need one of those app killers. But someone will write one for the iPhone none the less. If Apple allows it, more will follow.

  59. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Deosyne · · Score: 1

    No, that feature is included for all iPhone OS devices. So far, only multitasking has been specifically ruled out for some of them.

  60. Flash by codepunk · · Score: 3, Informative

    "Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript"

    Looks like the flash cross compiler just had a stake driven in it's heart.

    --


    Got Code?
    1. Re:Flash by dingen · · Score: 1

      So... what about Unity? What about Corona? Can't use those anymore also? I really don't think so.

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
    2. Re:Flash by codepunk · · Score: 1

      I am willing to bet that Apple will selectively target flash cross compiled apps. I don't think they want the flash devs to compete against those developers pumping out native apps, and I am all for that.

      --


      Got Code?
    3. Re:Flash by dingen · · Score: 1

      I think the main thing is that Flash will enable iPhone development on Windows. I think that doesn't fit into Apple's strategy and this is their way of locking Adobe out.

      But on the other hand, more apps is always something Apple is going to be interested in and in the end, who cares how they were created?

      --
      Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
  61. LOL! - iHandWaving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh god!

    It's like listening to some kid rambling about how his dog ate his homework...

    No wonder the computing world despises Apple fanboys so much.

  62. Apple is playing catch up by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Android has already had this since the G1

    AS well as a bunch of features the iPhone is just now getting, and a bunch it doesn't have.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Apple is playing catch up by DavidD_CA · · Score: 2, Informative

      Windows Mobile has already had this since 2002.

      AS well as a bunch of features the iPhone and Android are just now getting, and a bunch it doesn't have.

      --
      -David
    2. Re:Apple is playing catch up by Zuriel · · Score: 1

      Competition happens and consumers win. Working as intended, move along, nothing to see here.

    3. Re:Apple is playing catch up by Lars+T. · · Score: 0

      Android has already had this since the G1

      AS well as a bunch of features the iPhone is just now getting, and a bunch it doesn't have.

      So Android sucked before iPhone? Or is it the magic Google pixie dust that makes ads on Android an innovation and ads on iPhone proof that Apple is teh Evil?

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    4. Re:Apple is playing catch up by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      Android has already had this since the G1

      AS well as a bunch of features the iPhone is just now getting, and a bunch it doesn't have.

      Your comment tell me that you don't understand Apple. It doesn't care so much about having a long feature list. It cares about having the things it does work well and be easy to use.

      Even if it means not having a floppy drive or RS232 port, but just USB.

      It's something geeks often don't understand. I can however highly recommend to stop buying devices based on features, but use usability as measure instead. And I don't specifically mean Apple with that but any device in general.

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
  63. Re:well, sorta by mweather · · Score: 1

    It's not needed at all. It just saves a click or two. Same with wifi widgets. Not needed, just nice to have.

  64. iAds, the end is nigh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this uproar over iAds justified? I don't think so. First, the ads are for apps, not the phone service. Anyone who has an iPhone knows ads already exist in many free apps. Second, it's not forcing developers to implement ads, or switch from their current ad service to iAds. Rather it provides a built-in and consistent ad service offered by Apple that developers can choose to use (or not). So complain away, or think the situation through and realize you're just bashing Apple for the sake of it.

  65. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by thoughtsatthemoment · · Score: 1

    I think Apple have a good reason for doing so. All these web languages sacrifice resources for productivity. No big deal for desktop/server but it kills the phone.

  66. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by ShecoDu · · Score: 2, Informative

    Older devices will have a trimmed down version of the iPhone OS 4.0 which will not include multitasking because the older devices have 128MB of RAM.

    They will most probably have the ads API.

  67. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by a_ghostwheel · · Score: 1

    You do know about NDK, right?

  68. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    Don't worry. My next phone will not be from Apple. What some people do not get is that for every 1 person that complains, 8 more already gave up on your product without telling anyone. You should cherish the people who do complain. They at least are interested in you making the product better.

  69. Re:well, sorta by Movi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While i agree with most of what you said, there's one thing that i think you should know about the multitasking bit.

    The way that apple described it's multitasking capabilities in iPhone OS 4.0, seem to be identical in how android handles multitasking - eg your app can have a background worker, that does stuff in the background (media player, IMs, background task for periodically checking stuff), and then the user-visible multitasking of switching apps, where the app that was used gets its state saved, then the process gets killed. If that app is then resumed the code handles the reading of the state.

    This behaviour has been there since Android 1.0 (@override onPause() and @override onResume())

  70. Here's why mobile ads will be an epic fail by melted · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Currently, developers use the in-application ads to monetize free applications. This means that the only people who will see those apps are freeloaders who don't want to pay $0.99 for the full version of the app. Those folks won't tap on the ads, and even if they do, they won't buy stuff. Epic fail.

    1. Re:Here's why mobile ads will be an epic fail by iotaborg · · Score: 1

      You've never heard of impressions?

    2. Re:Here's why mobile ads will be an epic fail by getNewNickName · · Score: 1

      By that logic why would freeloaders using google care to click on ads either? It all depends on if Apple can target their ads effectively like google does. People are naturally resistant to paying for something if they can get for free. But that doesn't equate to those same people never willing to part with their cash especially when they've just bought an expensive Apple gadget.

    3. Re:Here's why mobile ads will be an epic fail by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      Currently, developers use the in-application ads to monetize free applications. This means that the only people who will see those apps are freeloaders who don't want to pay $0.99 for the full version of the app. Those folks won't tap on the ads, and even if they do, they won't buy stuff. Epic fail.

      That's what I thought at first, and I've been ignoring the in-app ads since I got my iPhone. I'm good at ignoring ads on traditional webpages too (I don't adblock, and I haven't turned Slashdot's optional ads off either).

      However, after watching the video of the iPhone 4 sneak peek event, I have to change my opinion. The demo ads they whipped up were at least mildly engaging, with interactive games, videos, and links to buy music and probably other things on iTunes. All of this without Flash, and none of it took you out of the current app, like current ads have to.

      Not saying I'm more likely to buy anything because of the new ad framework, but I can definitely see myself checking some out when it comes online (three words for developers and advertisers: first mover advantage!). And if a well-done iAd can pull in someone like me, who rarely acts on any form of TV, print or online advertising, then they're going to make a killing on people prone to impulse buys.

    4. Re:Here's why mobile ads will be an epic fail by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      So Apple's solution will be worse at "monetizing free applications" than the myriad of home-rolled solutions that currently exist, to the point that all the others will suddenly stop working? I don't get your logic here.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    5. Re:Here's why mobile ads will be an epic fail by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "Currently, developers use the in-application ads to monetize free applications."

      "Those folks won't tap on the ads, and even if they do, they won't buy stuff. Epic fail."

      Those two statements seem to be contradictory. There are ad supported apps and have been for some time, so either the developers who use those ads are a) deluding themselves or b) making enough money to justify them.

      There are even older examples. This web site for example, shows ads to non-subscribers and an ad free version to those willing to pay.

  71. But... multiple e-mail users? by dbc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article is unclear if e-mail has been expanded to support multiple user logins. This to me is the deal-breaker with an iPad -- I'd have one sitting on the coffee table today if it had support for multiple user logins to keep e-mail sorted and private. But I'm not going to get an iPad for each member of the household just to keep e-mail private. So is that fixed or not? When they fix it, instant sale. Until then, nope.

    1. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by zuki · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of that old 'Midnight Love' ad that ran on BET in the 80's.

      "Hey Brother, what's this fine record playing?"
      "Midnight Love"
      "Say, could I borrow it?"
      "No my brother, you gotta get your own"

      Multiple email accounts? Maybe not, but multiple iPads FTW!!

    2. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by anethema · · Score: 1

      You can have as many accounts as you'd like. Not sure what you're asking for?

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    3. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      The event focused on the iPhone. iPad isn't going to get iPhone OS 4 until much later this year. I'm sure Apple knows the answer, but I'm not sure anyone else does.

    4. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      You are not covered by the iPad's use case. It's more like the iPhone, inherently a personal device, not a "family tablet" to be shared. Buy a MacBook Air if you must have multiple users on a light portable device.

      OTOH there may be an App for that =)

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    5. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

      OTOH there may be an App for that =)

      It's called safari and a web-portal. You know, that way you check e-mail on a computer when you're away from your desk? The GP is just looking for excuses not to buy an ipad. That's actually fine by me, I don't want one either and I'm a mac user. Not because of anything bad, it's just that I can't think of a good reason to buy one since I have so many existing computers lying around the house. I can see how it might be more convenient than a laptop for goofy stuff, web-surfing, etc. though.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    6. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by prograde · · Score: 1

      But I'm not going to get an iPad for each member of the household just to keep e-mail private.

      Then you really aren't the type of customer that Apple cares about!

    7. Re:But... multiple e-mail users? by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      To be fair to OP, an app which supports generic POP/IMAP/Exchange/what-have-you might be necessary for accounts that don't have web mail access, e.g. a self-hosted mail server.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  72. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Macka · · Score: 1

    Pah, Storm Crow!

    When the next iPhone is released the 3G will be 2 years old. I have a 3G and so does my wife. We could have upgraded to the 3GS in Jan, but have decided to wait for the next gen phone in Jun/July then we can renew our contract, get a steep discount and be up to date for the subsequent 18 months. Anyone else on a 3G iPhone will do the same.

  73. 22 Million Android Phones A Year by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Way to make yourself look like a clueless idiot.

    Even more amazing for Android is the 22 million phones a year sales rate was for back in January. Android has been doubling its marketshare every quarter.

    1. Re:22 Million Android Phones A Year by dakameleon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Sales rate"? Are you projecting from the first month of sales for the Nexus One to a uniform total sales for the year? By that logic the iPad alone has a "sales rate" of roughly 109 million.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    2. Re:22 Million Android Phones A Year by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      "Sales rate"? Are you projecting from the first month of sales for the Nexus One to a uniform total sales for the year? By that logic the iPad alone has a "sales rate" of roughly 109 million.

      I'm not sure I agree with his end of year projection, but Gartner does forecast Android overtaking the iPhone, Blackberry, and Windows Mobile, by year 2012. And also, let's not forget, Mainland China (despite all the problems they had with Google) are forking and standardizing on Android 1.6. How many cell phone users does China have anyway?

    3. Re:22 Million Android Phones A Year by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      My point was not that Android won't overtake the iPhone in popularity or technical merit, but to highlight the danger of using a one-off month to project for an annual rate. If the figure quoted was based on Feb or March it might have more credence. For that matter, Gartner doesn't exactly have a stellar prediction record.

      That said, who is "Mainland China" exactly? Do you mean a/more-than-one PRC telecomms provider has forced Android for their own purposes? I'd hardly expect that to be as open the promise of Android is.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    4. Re:22 Million Android Phones A Year by rmav · · Score: 1

      And also, let's not forget, Mainland China (despite all the problems they had with Google) are forking and standardizing on Android 1.6. How many cell phone users does China have anyway?

      And this will be a total disaster for Android. A huge market that will use only an older version of the OS, lacking some of the most recent features. Android is at 2.1, 3.0 is in development, and many older handsets cannot be upgraded. Not only that, but tens of millions of smartphones are still produced with 1.6 and customized in such a way that upgrades will be impossible. Most users just know that it is "Android" and will realize later, after they have signed their contracts, that they have been scre*ed.

      By allowing providers and handset makers the ability to tweak the OS, Google shoot Android in the foot. There will be increasing incompatibility between versions, handsets, and providers. Users will notice that, at least those that BUY and USE applications - and, guess what, THESE users are those that are important to developers. The users that never buy an app are irrelevant. Apple will not care much if a new handset maker sells 1B phones in a year, when the application market on these phones is small.

      I predict that many Android users will not be satisfied, and thus will leave the platform. On my iPhone, I know that I will get regular OS updates, that almost all my applications are guaranteed to work with the different devices, and this protects my investment in software. This makes most iPhone OS users loyal, or locked-in, depending from your perspective. Apple is going to laugh in the long run.

      I hope that Android will keep pressure on Apple, but it may *not* be on the basis of features, because handset makers and cellular service providers are not interested in that. This is a pity. Somehow I got the feeling that it will be Windows Phone 7 that will make pressure on Apple.

      Roberto

    5. Re:22 Million Android Phones A Year by karolbe · · Score: 1

      Hey you, fanboy, why you have chosen Nexus One which is sold only in a web store? Why don't you mention Motorola Droid/Milestone which actually outsold iPhone in the same period of time? (first 60-70 days since premiere).

    6. Re:22 Million Android Phones A Year by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      The Droid was released on November 6th, not January, the month which the OP was discussing the "sales rate".

      Not sure where you jumped to the fanboy conclusion, as I was attacking the falsity of a "sales rate" by contrasting it with a recently released product for which I knew the day-one sales.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  74. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by bonch · · Score: 0

    What some people do not get is that for every 1 person that complains, 8 more already gave up on your product without telling anyone.

    [citation needed]

  75. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    As if Apple fanboys were not enough. A Wikipedia fanboy. Try reading any of a dozen of marketing books. Or even better take a marketing course.

  76. Yes, it is using GCD by Kostya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I just downloaded some of the release notes (the beta is slowly coming over my pipe), but yes, it is using Grand Central to do the multi-tasking. It is listed as one of the key foundational technologies added.

    There's also quite a bit of documentation on how to use "blocks" (closures and lambdas to you unwashed, non-Apple people).

    I agree, it is clever to use GCD. But I'm also very surprised--I didn't think GCD was light-weight enough for something like the iPhone. Pretty cool!

    P.S. I'd link or copy and paste, but *technically* that would violate the NDA you sign as an iPhone developer. Hey wait, does talking about it ... [Apple gestapo busts down door] :-)

    --
    "Doubt your doubts and believe your beliefs." -- Switchfoot, Ode to Chin
    1. Re:Yes, it is using GCD by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      The key question is this: does it let you run arbitrary code in background for as long as you want?

  77. your missing the point by evil_marty · · Score: 1

    I hate ads like everyone else on the Internet but I can understand that we developers do need to eat and usually to eat you need food, and to have food you need money. That said, Apple are giving developers another avenue for income. I'm sure there are many iPhone apps that would see a greater audience if it were ad-supported instead of being bought or even have two versions of the same app (one with ads and one without). Of course this also leaves the gates open for the system to be abused with ads on purchased ads etc but this is not a new problem. Everyone criticizes Apple on they're closed architecture of the iPhone/iPad (me being one of them) but they are protecting it from being abused, and it has been abused with the flood of cookie-cut applications etc. Don't get me wrong, this isn't Apple's only motivation for locking down the system, I'm just pointing out one of them.

    1. Re:your missing the point by onecheapgeek · · Score: 1

      Apple takes 40% of the ad revenue, in addition to what percentage of the purchase price for the app?

    2. Re:your missing the point by evil_marty · · Score: 1

      it's 30% for app purchases. I don't think 40% is too bad of a cut for providing a simple ad service that would be easy to implement. If you don't like it, use someone else, you still have the freedom of choice for your ad agency.

  78. Wrong by linumax · · Score: 1

    From today's announcement, specifically Jobs himself: US Mobile Browser Usage

    Android is already at 19% vs iPhoneOS (likely includes iPods as well) is at 64%. Considering the fact that first Android devices were released in October 2008 vs. iPhone's initial release of June 2007, I'd say Android is doing pretty fucking well!

    1. Re:Wrong by Wovel · · Score: 1

      So you would say the 8 month difference in release accounts for the 45% difference in Browser usage (not market share), part of that is because iPhone still provides the best mobile browsing experience and Android does provide the only serious competition, but has a ways to go still. The interface is just not there.

    2. Re:Wrong by linumax · · Score: 1

      June 2007 - Oct 2008 ~ 16 months, twice what you came up with.

      Apple keeps babbling about browser share as a sign of market penetration, so it only makes sense to get back at them with the same "logic".

      Considering how heavily Apple markets iPhone and how mostly oblivious Google is in that era, (leaves it all to carriers which usually keep the Android name out) then yes, Android is doing pretty fucking well.

    3. Re:Wrong by fredmosby · · Score: 1

      The iPhone's been out for 34 months.
      The Android has been out for 17 months.

      That means it's been out 1/2 as long but it has less than 1/3 the market share. That's not necessarily bad, but I wouldn't call it great either. That's with the iPhone being restricted to people willing to switch to AT&T. Android will be less competitive if Apple comes to their senses and opens it up to other cell phone providers.

    4. Re:Wrong by Americano · · Score: 1

      Yeah... if only Google understood advertising, their company name would practically become a verb.

    5. Re:Wrong by rmav · · Score: 1

      That's with the iPhone being restricted to people willing to switch to AT&T.

      Uh, the world is not part of the U.S., you know. At least, not yet ;-)

      Roberto

    6. Re:Wrong by fredmosby · · Score: 1

      Do iPhone users have the ability to choose a cell phone provider outside of the U.S.?

    7. Re:Wrong by rmav · · Score: 1

      Do iPhone users have the ability to choose a cell phone provider outside of the U.S.?

      Depending on the market, yes. In some countries, such as Australia, or Italy, all (or almost all) providers offer the iPhone. In other countries, like Germany, the situation is exactly as in the States (only one provider, all iPhones are locked). In Italy, Belgium, Poland, and other states all iPhones are even sold unlocked and out of contract -- which means that you can put any SIM you want in it and you can even set-up tethering (starting with iPhone OS 3.1.3).

      Of course, if you buy a factory unlocked iPhone you pay up front the whole cost (in December 2008 I bought my 16Gb 3G in my native Italy for 569 EUR) but we do have some extremely cheap prepaid offers that include also large data packages (and on 3G networks as well). In fact, I use my iPhone 3G in Italy, Germany, Austria, South Africa and Chile regularly and I saved already $$$ on roaming charges...

      Roberto

    8. Re:Wrong by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Yes, I'm an iPhone user and I chose Rogers.

      Then again, I live in Canada, which I think is the point Roberto was trying to make.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    9. Re:Wrong by fredmosby · · Score: 1

      It sounds like I should make plans to buy an unlocked iPhone the next time I'm in Europe.

  79. welcome to the party, pal. by geekoid · · Score: 2, Insightful
    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  80. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or thanks to the firmware update, try changing keyboards from en to jp on any input box and enjoy your 4-6~ second wait. :(
    It makes the iphone not a very usable dictionary tool.

  81. Re:well, sorta by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

    I'm all for convenience and quick-access to features, etc. But what the parent is implying (and some people seem to think) is that one needs these apps to manage background processes. Not only are these quick-access to running apps, but they include auto-kill / cleanup features. And often this is touted as a way to save battery power.

    I was toying around with a couple of these and eventually realized that I just don't need them. I have one left that I've kept around for an alternative view of running applications. But I've found that my Droid tends to handle itself without my intervention (although sometimes an app will mis-behave - those usually get uninstalled if they do it too much).

  82. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Kymermosst · · Score: 1

    Well, I disagree with your presumption.

    My presumption is that it adds features that people have been clamoring for, and it's a great way to dangle a treat in front of people with the older devices in order to get them to buy new ones. Thus, increasing Apple's sales.

    --
    "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
  83. more control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The way I read the overall product it really seems as though apple is trying to gain even more control over the end users. So often is the case where people will use their private mobile phones on work exchange servers because the 'user experience' is so much better than what they get with the corporate blackberry or windows mobile. Some of the features are a welcome change (encryption etc) but it really seems that Apple is going out of its way to try and remove any hope of any adobe software on their platforms at all.. Keep telling users that their products are shit because you have competing products which are not nearly as capable and those users being apple fanbois will all fall into line and believe anything they are told.. welcome to the world of the eastern block..

  84. We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by parallel_prankster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, Apple is beginning to suffocate us developers. Instead of providing a way allow parallel user apps to either exit cleanly or kill them to avoid hogging CPU, Apple comes up with a way to tell you that Apple will provide for parallelism, you just have to hook into one of our services. Seriously, as a developer, that is very frustrating. We know the app that we are making and know where opportunities for parallelization lie. We dont want apple to tell us that. To avoid a few apps that misbehave, apple now thinks that it should not allow multitasking at user level at all!

    1. Re:We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by Trillan · · Score: 1

      So instead of piggybacking on this implementation of multi-tasking by Apple, you'd prefer to piggyback on some other implementation of multi-tasking by Apple?

      Sure, this is harder for developers (I'm one too, with two apps in the App Store so far). But you know what? I'm okay with that. Making multitasking more deliberate on my part is a huge win for the user, and they matter more than I do.

    2. Re:We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by edelbrp · · Score: 1

      To avoid a few apps that misbehave, apple now thinks that it should not allow multitasking at user level at all!

      I think you forgot that Apple already tried co-operative multitasking on early Macs. It didn't work so well...

    3. Re:We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by mr100percent · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Watching the developers on Stage, I didn't get that impression. The Pandora devs said it only took a day to modify the app to run in background. Not bad.

    4. Re:We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by dakameleon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're still working in their Multitasking API sandbox. Without having seen the list of APIs myself, I can imagine that there would be cases which don't fall into any of the functions provided, and you really just want a GenericMultitaskHook or somesuch.

      For example, one of the most brilliant jailbreak tools is SBSettings, which lets you flick WiFi, Bluetooth, GPS, or Edge/3G off without having to dig down into the Settings app. Turning on bluetooth with SBSettings (for when you want to play multiplayer Flight Control, for instance) is a swipe of the status bar and a tap on a button, then another to close. With the Settings "app", it's Quit to Home > Go to Settings > General > Bluetooth > Flick switch > Quit to Home > Reopen app.

      Will Apple allow the built in Settings app to run in the background? will they expose APIs to manipulate these settings?

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    5. Re:We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by yivi · · Score: 1

      Yes, they allow the Settings application to run in the background. As shown by The Jobs himself in the event video...

      Regards,

      I.-

    6. Re:We are all living in the world of Steve Jobs by EMH_Mark3 · · Score: 1

      I don't see what your example has to do with multitasking. What you're asking for is a way to manipulate system settings from custom apps -- having the settings app run in the background just saves you a few 'clicks'.

      --
      Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me
  85. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    Woohoo! I can develop a subset of my apps on a specific CPU for a multi-CPU supoprting platform!

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  86. iAd?? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Screw you Apple.

    I have always, ALWAYS defended apple and their sometimes questionable acts, but this is WAY over the line and is not defendable.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:iAd?? by die444die · · Score: 1

      How is this over the line? You understand that iAd is an opportunity for developers to use ads in their (generally) free applications to support revenue. The ads are already there, it's just easier on the developers now.

      --
      die444die
    2. Re:iAd?? by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Why is that? Some free apps already use advertising. Apple is providing a framework the developers can use instead of writing their own or finding one. What is the problem with that?

      The only thing this will change is better limit the amount of data being tracked on you, because at least some of the existing advertising frameworks are violating your privacy in ways they have promised they wouldn't.

    3. Re:iAd?? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Yes, and now that they have made it easy, the use of Ads will explode and be even harder to avoid.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    4. Re:iAd?? by mikestew · · Score: 1

      Yes, and now that they have made it easy

      Right, because previously AdMob was your other option, and using that in an iPhone app was on the level of rocket science or brain surgery. You want to avoid ads? Don't buy ad-supported apps.

      I'm amazed that the complaining about iAd primarily consists of "Apple iz putting da ads on our phonez!", instead of "Apple copied AdMob and pretends they invented the idea". The latter is a valid argument, the former just means someone hasn't been paying attention.

    5. Re:iAd?? by medcalf · · Score: 1

      Ah, the concern troll finally appears.

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    6. Re:iAd?? by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1

      I'm amazed that the complaining about iAd primarily consists of "Apple iz putting da ads on our phonez!", instead of "Apple copied AdMob and pretends they invented the idea". The latter is a valid argument, the former just means someone hasn't been paying attention.

      How is "Apple copied the idea of selling ads" a valid argument? That's like crying, "Hey, you stole my lunchbox!" when another kid shows up with the same item at school.

      This is a huge development. When a MASSIVE revenue stream is suddenly the life blood of Apple, (And it will be; you can take a cut of an app's sale price only once, but ads just keep on giving), it will turn Apple into the new god of media. The "i" experience is going to be little different than television now.

      The yucky part is that this was obviously pre-meditated and carefully timed.

      Get them addicted to the non-advert experience, build up a head of steam over the iPad and right when everybody has committed, hit them with the news that ad-ware news. They'll be so blushed out with the iPad that we can pull crap like this and the user base will do our arguing and rationalizing for us!

      But that's only while they still have something resembling brains. Those will melt away soon enough. And then "i" customers will have successfully become the new AOL crowd.

      -FL

  87. Mobile ads are an epic WIN by TRRosen · · Score: 1

    Reality proves you wrong. Take sound grenade, a stupid little app that plays a sound after a period of time elapses that the maker wrote it in a hour to see if he could. He now makes over $100 an hour off of click thru ads in the free version.

    $100 an hour from an attempt to make as crappy an app as possible!

  88. Bluetooth by drolli · · Score: 1

    Does it finally support: -Bluetooh keyboards (non apple) -bluetooth headset (non-apple) -beaming contact by bluetooth to other mobile phones?

    1. Re:Bluetooth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, it supports non-apple bluetooth headsets. I've used several that all worked absolutely fine. Generic brands included.

    2. Re:Bluetooth by medcalf · · Score: 1

      Yes, yes, don't know

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
  89. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by mjwx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Go ahead and jailbreak an iPhone 3g and try to run more than 2 apps at the same time. It slows to a CRAWL.

    My Android phone (Milestone) does this,
    no...
    wait...
    It doesn't.

    Many devices can implement proper multi-tasking without sacrificing speed. I easily have 3 to 5 applications running at the same time on Android without any problems, the only slow downs I have ever seen on Android were when I used a custom ROM on my HTC Dream, replacing that with HTC's Android 1.6 image fixed it.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  90. Competing ad networks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wonder how long developers will continue to be allowed to use ad servers that compete with iAds (for example, MobClix), which might, for example, offer more than a 60% cut or access to advertisers that iAds might censor (such as advertisements for Apple competitors or controversial content).

  91. Re:well, sorta by mjwx · · Score: 1

    I'm not even so sure that Android users need one of those app killers.

    Not really, as of 1.5 Android was pretty good at freeing up resources, as of 2.0 a task killer was inbuilt. Albeit the task killer is buried in the settings menu I've never actually needed to use it.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  92. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i'm doing it right now and it's not slowing down much at all. and this is actual background/multitasking, not what apple is proposing. apple's only allowing you to do very specific things in the background, and if your app does anything else the OS shuts the app down. in fact, there's no guarantee that your app will continue running in the background even if you ONLY utilise the seven blessed background APIs.

  93. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by marcansoft · · Score: 1

    No it doesn't, unless the apps are crap. The real problem is RAM, not CPU. On a 3G, you can run 5-7 lightweight apps with ease, but you can barely run 2 heavyweight apps at once. The symptom is that it runs out of RAM, freezes for a short while, then kills one of the apps.

    For example, right now, I just backgrounded Messages, Photos, Notes, Weather, Clock, Calculator, and Voice Memos. That worked fine; those are very lightweight. Then I opened Twitterific, which is starting to push things. Nothing got killed yet though. Then I opened Maps, and that pushed it over the edge; Clock and Notes got killed. Then I opened YouTube and hit a video, and that nuked Calculator and Voice Memos, plus YouTube itself refused to background and got killed as I hit home. Then I opened iPod to listen to some music, which worked fine thanks to the defunct YouTube. But once you open Cydia, abandon all hope; everything but iPod gets killed.

  94. Fairly idiotic. by aussersterne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You prove the parent's point nicely. You're so attached to multitasking that you're willing to sacrifice battery life. Of course battery life has something to do with the topic, IT'S A PHONE. And you can say "Welcome to fast smartphones" all you want, but for most people these features:

    - Has a reasonable battery life
    - Doesn't require me to swap batteries
    - Lets me listen to music in the background

    Are more important than this feature:

    - Lets me run sendmail in the background

    iPhone has the first three and has since the beginning. You running around saying "Yay! Multitasking!" isn't saving Palm, and I say this as a Palm customer of over a decade that has gone iPhone.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    1. Re:Fairly idiotic. by fatwilbur · · Score: 1

      So if, as you put it, "IT'S A PHONE", why do people care so much about running lame applications on their phone? I think the whole 'apps' feature is incredible overrated, indeed some unscientific surveys confirmed this: iPhone app usability.

      From the article:
      In the first part of each session, we asked users to walk us through their own iPhone apps. We frequently heard comments such as, "I downloaded this because [it sounded cool/a friend recommended it], but I haven't had time to try it." Users also often said something like, "I used this a few times right after I downloaded it, but I'm not using it anymore -- I just haven't gotten around to deleting it."

      People are just buying these things because someone told them it was cool. I use my phone for, I dont know, COMMUNICATION PURPOSES? Calling, texting, and possibly email, those are the important features.

    2. Re:Fairly idiotic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you want to run sendmail??

      If I could run Postfix in the background on my phone, now that would awesome!

    3. Re:Fairly idiotic. by Funk_dat69 · · Score: 1

      You should give Palm another chance instead of burying your head in Apple beach. The Pre is great.

      - Has a reasonable battery life

      -My Pre lasts all day. That's reasonable to me. Then I toss it on its little wireless charger at home.

      - Doesn't require me to swap batteries

      Agree, but why wouldn't you want the capability to swap the battery if you needed to? There's no logical reason.

      - Lets me listen to music in the background

      This is great!

      I would add multi-tasking to this list. Multitasking doesn't mean running sendmail in the background, it's more like having 3 webpages open to 3 different restaurant menus (2 on web, 1 PDF), while having google maps open to see locations and listening to music. I do this all the time with my Pre. Sure, it does use more battery when you have multiple cards open, but you don't have them open all the time! You open 3 or 4 or 5 cards, then pitch them. Totally worth the 15 seconds of battery drain. I couldn't go back to not having it at this point.

      --
      FUNK!
    4. Re:Fairly idiotic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course battery life has something to do with the topic, IT'S A PHONE.

      Well his point is: it could have been much more than only a phone.

    5. Re:Fairly idiotic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Pre lasts all day. That's reasonable to me.

      My iPhone lasts all night. I think we can all agree that that's the more important metric when it comes to the ladies.

    6. Re:Fairly idiotic. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your points are valid. But remember that Palm has been putting out the worst smartphone ads known to man, that must hurt too.

  95. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by marcansoft · · Score: 1

    Chances are the OS is going to be exactly the same, and you can tweak a plist file on a jailbroken phone to enable multitasking on older devices. You can easily make a 3G think it's a 3GS. The feature will be there, just disabled.

  96. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    You know, that's great ideals. Problem is I tried that. I avoided the iPhone for years, Nokia is crap, I wasted a lot of cash on that phone. Motorola Droid.... crap, did not integrate with exchange well, and no work apps that worked for it. My other choice was a Windows Mobile phone. I had 4 of them, I got tired of having to reboot the damn phone daily. it silently stops ringing or responding to calls.

    I tried an iphone for 30 days, dammit this thing just works for the apps I needed for work, and exchange push. It is the ONLY phone I was ablet oget that worked reliably, had the app support for the trouble ticket system at work, email and exchange integration... I hate that.

    If I could find a smart phone OS that was not locked that worked with everything at work... I'd buy it. Guess what, I tried to buy them, I have a drawer full of the current phones and past phones from the past 2 years. they all failed.

    If you dont need your phone to make you money, that's great. You can put up with substandard stability (windows Mobile/Nokia S60), or will not run into the limitations that were show stoppers for me.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  97. Finally Steve Jobs listens... by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

    Finally Steve Jobs is listening to what iPhone users want. More ads!

    I don't know how many times I've heard an iPhone user saying "It's a great phone, and I love the apps, but I could really use more adware."

    1. Re:Finally Steve Jobs listens... by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      Steve's just cranky because the only reason his iPhone is a success is because of games and gaming is beneath him and his vision. So now he's punishing his peasants for gaming so much with ads. Apparently, you're allowed to do anything on your "bicycle of the mind" except have fun.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
  98. Apple sycophants by masmullin · · Score: 1

    Did the applaud for the iAd? Did they pull Steve's iCock out of their mouths long enough to tell him how good it tasted?

  99. Oh Hai Iphone fanboy. by mjwx · · Score: 1

    I didn't see you down there from Android's height of superiority.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  100. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    Nah. My next phone will most likely be Android based. Alternatively could be something like N900 next-gen (MeeGo). I could have lived with Windows Mobile, had not Microsoft decided they will copy his Steveness and his monopolist app store, not allowing me to install apps I develop, with the tools I want, on my own phone. Try even getting an Apple store account (necessary to use your phone, otherwise its just an expensive paperweight) without a credit card number and see the rigamarole Apple makes you go through to get one. Clearly their #1 concern is making money hand over fist. Not you, the consumer, nor even making great products. Well, its a shame but I do not think I want to buy anything more from you Apple.

    I also thought the iPhone was great for the first days. Then I read what I had to do in order to develop software for it, or what someone else who wants to develop software for it needs to do. Oh and I do software development. So I make money. Developing. Software. Custom made, so I have no problems with piracy. DRM is useless to me. Nor do my clients want ads, so this is a misfeature to me as well.

    Nor am I interested in buying more Apple products like an iMac just so I can do iPhone development. I have enough fun listening to people who have them tell me they need to do constant OS upgrades to be able to run software, until the day his Steveness decides their hardware isn't worth supporting anymore. Then people complain about Android versions. Hah!

    Developers, developers, developers (as some other Steve would say).

  101. Funny because it's true by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Informative

    Also, apparently Apple is the market leader in cutting and pasting.

    On mobile devices - yes. They actually have an implementation that works really well, system wide, and as OS updates come along has become quite flexible as far as data type support.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  102. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by smileyphase · · Score: 1

    It depends on the apps. I used to run backgrounder with a SIP client - it worked on a 3G (and I could play games at the same time) until wireless went to sleep. Eventually I rolled back to the non-jailbroken OS. Multitasking without constant wifi was just not worth it for me.

  103. Looking forward to the articles about this by Kitkoan · · Score: 1

    Great, so when this update goes live I get to look forward to titles like 'iPhone can now multi-task, competitors scrambles to do the same.' just like I do with the iPad and reading how companies are now 'just making' tablet PC's, to compete against Apples iPad tablet even though computer makers have been making them for years...

    --
    Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
  104. Depressing... by Ekuryua · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Between apple and sony, the world seems to be going towards lawyer locking of everything as fast as possible.
    I'm not sure about other people, but that sanitized future world is kind of really depressing.
    Next step is you'll have to spend all your digital money to the 4 big corporations that control and enforce each of their platforms integrity in totalitarian ways.

    News... that only come from a couple big media agencies.
    Games... that check permanently online they're unmodified, and require trusted platforms banning any form of liberty/homebrew.
    Videos&Music... that only come out in DRM form with you-are-only-renting-from-us terms.
    Internet connections... where you can only do what the isp deems safe.
    etc...

    1. Re:Depressing... by swilver · · Score: 1

      News...I could live without, in the highly unlikely event they manage to put everything behind paywalls.
      Games...I only need a few that cater to my wishes to keep me entertained.
      Video&Music...I already stopped listening to anything newly released for a decade and have been enjoying what I already have. Videos I don't really need to own as they have much lower replay value.
      Internet connections...Encryption will make sure I can do anything I want no matter what my ISP says (never mind there's like 15+ ISP choices here -- courtesy of our goverment which requires companies to lease its copper and fiber networks to competitors for reasonable prices). In the worst case scenario, BBS-style exchange networks over WiFi will form that can completely bypass the need for ISP's.

      Why anyone would put up with anything Sony or Apple is beyond me. Yes, they may sometimes have some novell must-have toys, but I instead just wait until a "free" version is available from competitors.

      Android, with its open platform and low barrier to entry, is still playing catch up now not even being a year old. It is however obvious that Apple will lose this battle within a year from now, simply because a single company with a single phone will not be able to compete against dozens of companies, with hundreds of phones types all doing their best to extend Android to best suit their customers. They won't go after just the gadget-geek market either, but all of the markets at once.

  105. Re:No ads please -- HTML fixed by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1
    Sorry to double-post. HTML closing tag fixed. (I did say I was tired)

    So because many people will go along with something and will not oppose it on principle, and therefore precedent for it exists, that automatically means it's not exploitative and is not an instance of double-dipping?

    You feel exploited by a company having more than one revenue stream. Fine, there is nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is extrapolating your feelings to everyone else. This principle of yours is yours... not mine. Do not assume it applies to everyone else who goes along with something. Maybe they go along with it because it does not violate any principle of theirs -- in my case, if I feel I'm getting fair value out of the deal, I don't feel exploited.

    You seem to so badly need to make this a matter of taste or preference. No. I oppose this not because I find it distasteful, or like something better. I'm sorry you automatically assume everything is that shallow. I oppose it because I believe it's wrong.

    And I do not believe it is wrong. And yet you feel that it is everyone's responsibility to stand up for your (misguided, IMO) principles. It is a matter of taste and preference, insofar as taste and preference include our values of what is right and wrong in an economic transaction. Because consumer-level economic transactions are all about taste and preference.

    What have I limited? Back this up, please. I have not been calling for the government to use force to stop them. I have not in any way tried to prevent anyone from doing what they like. What I have done is explain that I won't be going along with this, and that I did not arrive at that decision by flipping a coin. It's the case for several good reasons.

    You have not directly limited anything. But what you believe to be the correct solution (black/white -- only one revenue source for content/app providers) would limit my options as a consumer of technology. Basically, you have an objection to a problem that I don't believe exists, and I'll explain why below.

    Your need to trivialize this by making it a matter of taste or preference, ignoring my principled objection, and acting like I am somehow limiting anyone by speaking my mind weakens your argument more than I likely could.

    Please, do not put thoughts in my mind or words in my mouth. I stated my positions in response to yours, no need to start assuming things about me that were not written, said, or thought by me. You speaking your mind, I have no objection to -- what I do have objection to is the results of how you think content/app revenue should work. This is not about you... it is about your specific position on this issue, which necessarily involves your value system and your opinions, which I needed to address if I'm going to explain why I disagree with you. Please do not take it as a personal attack, it is no such thing.

    Let me sum up my point very clearly so we don't get bogged down in more unfounded claims (my "need", etc).

    The decision to enter an economic transaction is simple -- is what I get out of the deal worth the same or more than what I put into it? How we value what we put into it and what we get out of it may vary. For example, you place a high value on things that you feel are exploitative, and you have a different set of behaviors that you consider exploitative than I do. There is not anything wrong with that.

    Elaborating of the exploitation issue -- this is the thing that I do think is misguided about your position: that a company that has more than one revenue stream is somehow exploitative because of "double-dipping", which makes their business model morally incorrect. You still have the choice of accepting or refusing their terms for the good or service provided. As long as you have that choice, and have the information needed to make that choice, the

    --
    "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  106. That sucks! $%&^#$!! by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    I can't believe Apple would do this to their loyal users. Those little Eichmanns!!!

    In other news, I'm also pissed off because I just found out that Nissan is releasing a new hybrid version of its Maxima but there will be no free upgrade available for my 2001 car. Corporate bastards!!!

  107. thanks for the car analogy! by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    I can't use a Corvette to move a sofa without extensive modification or strapping it to the roof in an unwieldy manner, but I don't whine about it.

    You're just not using your imagination. Put the sofa in front of the vette and drive forward. Problem solved!

  108. Don't want to code in Obj-C? Tell somone who cares by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.ftc.gov/bc/tech/index.htm

  109. Re:well, sorta by binarylarry · · Score: 1

    lalalala I can't hear you

    - apple fan boy

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  110. Jailbreak by ffohwx · · Score: 1

    Welp...after learning today that multitasking would not make it to the iPod Touch 2g, I figured out that I had wrongly held out hope. I jailbroke it an hour ago, and now have multitasking, and many of the other features announced. Why did I even bother waiting?

  111. Re:If they had opened up multitasking to all apps by afidel · · Score: 1

    Uh, yeah being able to have Pandora in the background, able to be controlled even when the phone is locked is SUCH an esoteric feature. And I'm sure noone would ever want to be able to receive an incoming Skype call when Skype wasn't the currently open app. I think it is YOU who are the idiot....

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  112. Hey, hey, let's come together now by snowwrestler · · Score: 1

    iPhone...Android...sure we can fight about which platform is better. But the important thing is that we all determine our levels of happiness and pride by the relative merits of the software platforms of our phones.

    I mean--let's keep our priorities straight here, people.

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  113. Except of course for everything. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    On the iPhone what you can do is limited to what Apple thinks users should be doing

    Unless you jailbreak.

    So basically technical users can do all the technical things they want, while non-technical users get an easier to use platform.

    But hey, I can understand you N900 users not wanting users to have a choice of something they can easily understand how to use, so that you can continue to feel superior to everyone.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Except of course for everything. by vadim_t · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless you jailbreak.
      So basically technical users can do all the technical things they want, while non-technical users get an easier to use platform.

      I do not like this kind of solution. Why would I want to give money to a company that doesn't want me to do what I want with a device I paid for? It's stupid to pay somebody who is acting against your interests.

      I consider this to be a very temporary solution at best. I might be willing to do it, but only if no alternative is available. Since the N900 exists, I have no reason to consider buying an iPhone.

      But hey, I can understand you N900 users not wanting users to have a choice of something they can easily understand how to use, so that you can continue to feel superior to everyone.

      Heh, that's a funny thing to say.

      It's not that I don't want you to have a choice. I'm just giving some friendly advice, based on past experiences. Buy it all you want if you like, but don't complain if you end up running into the limitations one day.

  114. Unity is grey area by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Ever heard of UnrealScript? Unity game engine C# (using Mono) or Javascript? Or even OpenGL ES 2.0 shaders?

    Pretty obviously OpenGL shaders are exempt.

    Unity is an interesting grey area, since it actually spits out a project that you compile with XCode. But you do write the game logic in another language... but since code compiled from an XCode project looks all the same, and you aren't really building application UI's with it I think it will be fine - plus it would really hamstring the game market.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  115. "beaming"? by SuperKendall · · Score: 0, Troll

    The phone today supports any Bluetooth headset. The 4.0 updates provides support for Bluetooth keyboards (which the iPad already has).

    As for contact info, well I can always email someone a vCard... "beaming" doesn't really work well between anything. There are also a million apps to help capture or share contact details.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:"beaming"? by dakameleon · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Beaming"/bluetooth contact/file transfer worked pretty bloody well for my Nokia and Sony Ericssons. Indeed, iSync made it wonderfully easy to wirelessly sync updated contact info to my Mac. Why is this missing for the iPhone?

      (indeed, why didn't Apple use iSync for the iPhone?)

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
  116. The Revolution Will be Sponsored for You By by Mana+Mana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ``If you don't want to see the ads, don't buy ad-supported apps. There is almost always a more expensive ad-free version.''

    Gad! Stop kidding yourself with statements like these: you paid full price so ads wont appear for the now fully fed. Fallacious: see cinemas with 30 minutes of boring-obnoxious ads & trailers!

    See paid! cable television "broadcasts" riddled with ads. See PBS shows larded with 5 minutes of introductory wheat fields, granaries, mines, wind fields ads. See XM/Sirius radio with ... ^.^

  117. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by quadelirus · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately I think many are often more interested in flame wars and stroking their egos by putting down other people. Especially on /., land of the I-Told-You-So. The trifecta of Apple vs. MS vs. Linux/Android/Firefox gets tiring.

  118. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by herojig · · Score: 1

    Mine is jailbroke, runs Backgrounder, and works fine...seems even faster as the multi-tasked apps that I need fast are ready, like Zoom In and the like. Try that... don't get all the blather on this, it's already fixed if you truly own your iPhone:)

    --
    I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
  119. Re:If they had opened up multitasking to all apps by terjeber · · Score: 2, Informative

    without once bothering to wonder whether it's appropriate on a small-screen embedded device. It isn't.

    Calling someone a "douchebag" just because he has a more functional brain than you do is not nice. Remember, most people are far more intelligent than you, don't hate them for it.

    If multitasking isn't appropriate on a small-screen device, why has the iPod and the iPhone had it from day one? They have you know. The difference between pre 4.0 and post 4.0 is that this functionality is now available to comapnies that are not called Apple. As you should know if you have ever used an iPhone, the Apple music player goes on playing in the background when you do other stuff on the phone. Try it. Press the "iPod" icon on your phone. Start playing music. Hit the home button - can you still hear the music? Sure you can. Bring up Echofon and check what Twitter is all about. Can you still hear the music? Of course you can. You can because the iPhone has had multitasking always, but only for Apple.

    You are a moron sir, for calling people names just because you are so in love with Steve Jobs that you can not take valid criticism of his products. A sad moron in fact.

  120. Re:well, sorta by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    The way that apple described it's multitasking capabilities in iPhone OS 4.0, seem to be identical in how android handles multitasking - eg your app can have a background worker, that does stuff in the background (media player, IMs, background task for periodically checking stuff), and then the user-visible multitasking of switching apps, where the app that was used gets its state saved, then the process gets killed. If that app is then resumed the code handles the reading of the state.

    You're almost correct. Where it's wrong is that your app cannot have any background worker. Rather, the OS supplies a few background workers for "common things", to which you can post tasks and register notifications. If whatever you want to do isn't a "common thing", you're still SOL.

    They do have one service that's named "Task finishing", which looks like it's a general-purpose background worker which can be used to execute some arbitrary piece of code. However, they describe it as "if your app is in mid-task when your customer leaves it, the app can now keep running to finish the task" - which, I suspect, means that it'll kill any task after a certain timeout, so you still can't use it to run your own daemon.

    All in all, it seems that e.g. writing an IM client for an existing network, or an IRC client, that would receive messages in background, is still not possible on iPhone - unless you also run your own server for push notifications, and tunnel user connection through that.

  121. Hrm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seeing a lot of features that are present in Android already...it makes me wonder if Apples lawsuit against HTC for IP violations in their Android phones is just posturing.

  122. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Probably because any intermediary code is going to invariably break with OS and API updates if wrappers and metaframeworks are used.

    Why? What makes "intermediary" code any different from any other code? It calls the same public functions in core API, in the end.

  123. How do you get privacy? by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    if it had support for multiple user logins to keep e-mail sorted and private.

    Who is root? Who can (and can't) install key loggers? Who has read access to which parts of the file system? You do use SMTP over TLS on all accounts so the email can't be sniffed on the network, right?

    Sorting the mail is the easier task. I'm not sure about privacy; exactly how would you design the system so it's even possible?

  124. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Woohoo! I can develop a subset of my apps on a specific CPU for a multi-CPU supoprting platform!

    So far, at least, Android is effectively standardized on ARM.

  125. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    So what you're saying is that Android is fast becoming a useless OS because everyone's shitting out the same hardware?

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  126. Because they're _searching for stuff_, maybe? by melted · · Score: 1

    Because they're _searching for stuff_, maybe? :-)

  127. iAD is AWSOME you dolt! by MikShapi · · Score: 1

    >> Ads on mobile phone? DO NOT WANT.
    YES WE DO. iAd is GOOD
    Two reasons:
    The minor one: More free apps on the store as app-writers will be able to live off the ad revenue.

    The major one: Right now, every other app implements its own ads mechanism.
    Nobody's gonna sit and de-ad all them 0.99$ apps.

    Enter iAd - a central OS-level facility to deliver ads. That's excellent. It's a single point of failure.
    Couple that with root access that allows you to modify any file on the system (that's a jailbreak, to the unix-uninitiated), and that spells one single place you need to jam a spanner (a cydia app that'll pro'lly boil up on Cydia inside 3.2 minutes from the iAd launch) and all ads in all your apps will just -go-.

    Go iAD!

    --
    -
  128. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by drtsystems · · Score: 1

    Your milestone has hardware on par with the 3GS, not the 3G. I have jailbroken my 3G and sure I CAN do background apps but it definitely slows things down (i.e. not something apple would find acceptable). Hell, the 3G only has 128mb ram, thats barely enough for safari.

  129. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Same architecture != same hardware. We've already seen several CPU generation changes for Android devices - to remind, G1 was 528Mhz Qualcomm, Droid was 600MHz Cortex A8, and Nexus One is 1Ghz Snapdragon. Everything else - e.g. GPUs - can be totally different as well. So I don't follow your logic here. Why would sticking to a particular architecture result in Android "fast becoming useless"? It has been the case for practically all mobile (and desktop!) platforms so far...

  130. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

    The whole point of the new multi-tasking APIs is to avoid exactly that slowdown, by transparently killing and resuming apps to keep enough RAM available. I find this assertion from Jobs curious because the G1 could do the same multi-tasking as the milestone. It worked fine, you just paid the "app resume" penalty a bit more often than on devices with more RAM.

  131. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by indiechild · · Score: 1

    It's a sensible choice. Apple was waiting for the CPU and RAM capacity to catch up before implementing "multitasking" features.

    I'm still using the 2G iPhone and I've never really yearned for multitasking. I'm not a power user, of course...

  132. Your subject line ain't lying. by rakslice · · Score: 1

    You know that 40% of the devices running iPhone OS aren't phones, right?

    1. Re:Your subject line ain't lying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know that 40% of the devices running iPhone OS aren't phones, right?

      OK. Which part of this does not apply to iPod Touch:

      for most people these features:

      - Has a reasonable battery life
      - Doesn't require me to swap batteries
      - Lets me listen to music in the background

      Are more important than this feature:

      - Lets me run sendmail in the background

  133. Hate ads.. someone has to pay for the bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I dont know about anyone else but this whole idea of ads inside apps is a terrible idea to me.
    I dont want more ads.
    I paid for my phone. I pay for my contract and my data limit.
    I work abroad and use my iphone for things like currencies etc. If there is a single byte downloads for an APP. then at some point I would have to have paid for it.

  134. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    I used multitasking on my HTC Wallaby in 2004. The device has got 64 megabytes of RAM and a 206 MHz StrongARM CPU. Background applications worked well, the phone was always responsive.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  135. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

    the shitty bit about this is that i own a "3G" ipod touch 8gb, which is nothing more then a 2G ipod with an exterior update to look like the actual 3Gs

    So apple sells this as a new ipod touch, but it wont run their newest software.. i wonder if OS 4.0 means the death of the 2.5G 8gb ipod.

    I'll survive though, considering ive gotten along without multitasking so far. I would have really liked it, but eh.. if i really want it i'll just have to pony up the dough for a new iPad nano...

    --
    People, what a bunch of bastards
  136. Protected functions on Smartphones by krischik · · Score: 1, Troll

    The iPhone did have multitasking - only it was a protected function up until now. Just like Symbian protects the All-File function. Just as restrictive but no one no one speaks about that.

  137. Take that !! by f0rk · · Score: 1

    Take that you apple loving fanbois!! Now you ALSO have multitasking. Didn't you all look at us android ppl and say "Well its better to not have multitasking as that would slow down the currently running program, and result in a bad user experiance".

    1. Re:Take that !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh man a doodely. We were a doodley lied to a doodely

  138. 10.000$ question ... by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    You will probably not *BUY YOUR CELLULAR CREDITS NOW THROUGH YOGIBEAR* get worried too much by any *GET YOUR LEGS SHAVED FASTER!* intrusive ads.

    Don't worry, you won't *GET VIAGRA CHEAP NOW!* be annoyed by it. *PLEASE WAIT FOR 10 SECONDS TO WATCH OUR AD BEFORE YOU CAN CONTINUE YOUR PHONECALL!*

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  139. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And it also has more CPU power and memory to use. Running applications can only use resources if they are available, older iPhones/iPod Touch doesn't have the hardware resources to run multiple applications.

  140. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by sirambrose · · Score: 1

    A jailbroken iphone does not usually slow down when an application runs in the background because it doesn't support virtual memory. In my experience, the phone frequently runs out of memory and kills your background applications. There isn't much point to running pandora or iradio in the background if safari is going to kill it to free up memory to load slashdot. I think that the multitasking in OS 4 would work better on the 2g iphone because the OS would know that pandora was playing music and try to kill mail and ipod before killing pandora.

  141. Platform? Or Cash Cow? by Demerara · · Score: 1

    Daring Firewall has this to say:

    "The App Store platform could turn into a long-term de facto standard platform."

    I'm sorry, but App Store is a revenue model, not a platform.
     

    --
    Backward%20compatibility%20is%20over-rated
  142. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by SpzToid · · Score: 1

    My 3 year old Nokia N95 multitasks fine. I can be logged into IMAP email, browse w/ Opera mini, listen to internet radio, on bluetooth A2DP headphones that softly mute when a VOIP/SIP call arrives. (Why buy a phone that doesn't support VOIP/SIP?)

    It also tethers via USB to provide 3g internet to my Ubuntu Asus Eee, for several hours on batteries. (And it is easy to hotswap an AA rechargeable for extra power; a great accessory)

    Those are some of the highlights, not an exhaustive list.

    GPS and Nokia's SportTracker free online service is great!

    The N79 has all this, costs half what I paid when the N95, and has a Polar heart meter receiver built-in too. So when you upload your workout to SportTracker, images and videos are geo-tagged to your route, (and pop-up in an Ajax window to play), playlists listened-to are also recorded, along with heart-performance along the route.

    When I upgrade eventually, I'm leaning towards the N900, or whatever follows it. Nokia likes linux folks like us.

    --
    You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
  143. it multitasking important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By comparison with what I see my co-workers doing on the desktop I would say that most people don't multitask.

    What I see it that they have several applications open at a time but each one fills the whole screen. So they only work on one app at a time.

    1. Re:it multitasking important by die444die · · Score: 1

      The user's ability to multitask is not what is being questioned. Just because someone chooses to focus on one thing doesn't mean they want all of their other programs to halt while they do so. Prime example: I was listening to This American Life the other night on my iPod Touch. Someone played a word in "Words with Friends (Scrabble)". Without thinking I switched to Words with Friends, and my audio from This American Life died.

      --
      die444die
  144. Isn't it curious.... by dskzero · · Score: 1

    ... that multitasking is being announced a week after the iPad is released? Wasn't the lack of multitasking one of the heaviest criticism directed at the design of the iPad? Why wasn't that feature shipped with the iPad anyway?

    --
    Oblivion Awaits
    1. Re:Isn't it curious.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As iPhone OS 4.0 is still in it's beta stage, I think the answer to that is obvious. It ain't ready!! Believe it or not, large companies can frequently have more than one thing happening at a time - (multitasking). While the iPad group and the iPhone OS group probably work closely, I would imagine they have different timelines. If I had to guess the OS guys were working on getting the current iPhone OS tested and built for the iPad until recently. Most new features would be put on hold until the next version. You know, 4.0. Doesn't seem curious to me at all.

  145. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by yabos · · Score: 1

    Yeah, and how come I can't run XBox games on the PS3? F*cking Sony, they should just support it because I want it.

  146. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by yabos · · Score: 1

    Um, yeah I've done that on my 3G and if you try and run Fring in the background, the phone slows to a crawl. The 3G and 1st gen iPhone don't have the memory to support more than about 3 applications at the same time. This is not counting all the resident daemons running.

  147. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    Because it means that your choice of Android phones are going to become a sea of non-descript, mediocre devices that don't do anything special in a variety of prices.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  148. Re:Apple banning iPhone frameworks in other langua by sznupi · · Score: 1

    How does that follow from using the same (because it's simply most optimal) cpu architecture? Heck, an architecure used in virtually all mobile phones, whatever they are, period.

    (not that I'm saying targeting it directly would be a good agreed, like one paretn poster suggested; ARM does change things from time to time AFAIK)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  149. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your Android Milestone is also 18 months newer than the iPhone 3G, so it's not really a fair comparison, is it?

  150. Why an exception to the rule? by KlomDark · · Score: 1

    I don't get why a place full of people rabidly enthusiastic about open source and freedom, continuously give attention to this shitty fruit company that is antithetical to most of the ideas we enthusiastically support.

    So basically anything is bad if it's not open source with full control, unless it's AppHole - they can do what they want and thats excellent. I don't get it. Apple is the enemy - ignore the hypnotic advertising.

    Speak out before Apple takes your freedom!

  151. We already have ads by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    This already exists in the App Store, but the feature has to be coded specifically per-app.

    Yes, the no-Ads people are a bit late to the party. Many of the free apps I use already have some advertising. All Apple is doing is providing additional support for something that developers are already doing (and looking for a cut of the profits in return, of course).

  152. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A Milestone is more comparable to a Nexus One or Desire or 3GS.

    A 3G is essentially a 1st gen iPhone.

    But even then I am not sure what the GP is talking about. You can background the iPod App and play a decent game on the 3G and you won't notice any slow down.

    Apple has implemented multitasking properly. We just can't have it.

  153. WebOS/Pre is great by Funk_dat69 · · Score: 1

    Not sure where you are getting your info. My Pre lasts all day. Having a bunch of cards open does drain the battery a bit faster, but you don't keep them open all day.

    I often have 3 web pages open to 3 different restaurants menus, while also having google maps open to see where they are while listening to music the whole time. I flip back and forth make the decision, then close the cards. Why would you not want that? You have been fooled (hoodwinked!) if you think the 15 seconds of higher battery usage is not worth it.

    The only thing I see as a gripe is the touch screen is a little less accurate than an iphone, but thats it. It's flashy and slick AND open.

    --
    FUNK!
  154. What you like, vs. reality by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    I do not like this kind of solution

    We are not talking about YOUR personal likes and dislikes. We are talking about technical abilities.

    If you meant to refer only to what you yourself like, you need to frame the discussion that way instead of stating the device has a general technical issue when anyone with five free minutes can overcome it.

    I can fully understand why on principal, someone may not accept that solution - but it's not a pragmatic answer at all, if all you want to do is do something that can only be done via jailbreaking.

    don't complain if you end up running into the limitations one day.

    This seems unlikely to happen because as I said there are no limitations for someone willing to jailbreak.

    That is the technical reality.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What you like, vs. reality by vadim_t · · Score: 1

      That's a short sighted way of viewing things.

      The really pragmatic approach is thinking before buying about not only how things are right this minute, but how could they possibly change during the useful life of the object. For a car for instance I'd consider not only the purchase price, but also the long term reliability, maintenance costs, availability of spare parts, etc.

      For an iPhone, yes, right now you can jailbreak it. But how about later? Apple already demonstrated they have to problem with bricking jailbroken phones, and releasing updates that close the holes that make it possible. They clearly do not like it. And again, why would I want to give money to somebody who really doesn't seem to want to have me as a customer?

      Jailbreaking is a pretty cool achievement, but it's something that exists thanks to volunteers that could at any time find something more exciting to do.

  155. Re:app lock down and lock in is bad censorship as by david_thornley · · Score: 1

    This is slashdot. For everybody who complains, 0.08 more already gave up on the product without telling anyone. Since the complainer was typically not using any Apple product anyway, Apple may lose up to 0.28 customer per complaint. It's not a problem for Apple, but I do feel sorry for the customer losing 28% of his or her body.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  156. Monopoly by tepples · · Score: 1

    Why did you buy it then, and not an Android based phone?

    Android didn't exist when iPhone came out.

    1. Re:Monopoly by jo_ham · · Score: 1

      Again, if you read his post (and my reply when some AC also tried to point this out) he says he has a 3GS, which was released 6 months after the first Android phone.

  157. Pandora is less useful on the iPod Touch by tepples · · Score: 1

    iPod Touch already lets you listen to iTunes and MP3s in the background. You just can't listen to Pandora, but Pandora is less useful on the iPod Touch anyway because it will drop when you leave Wi-Fi coverage.

  158. what feature? by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    In other words, the feature that Apple was touting was reliable battery life and performance. Apple's initial solution to this was limiting the iPhone to Apple produced and tested applications. They subsequently relaxed this to allow 3rd party applications, but requiring approval and not permitting background processing. And they have now further relaxed this by introducing a framework for 3rd party background processing that preserves these key features.

  159. speed by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    On release, multiple benchmarks showed that Safari on the original iPhone was faster at rendering web pages than competing devices. Obviously, everybody has gotten faster, but the iPhone still tests close to the head of the pack.

    Obviously that does not mean that you can't find web sites that will bog down on the iPhone--or on a computer, for that matter.

  160. Re:well, sorta by rgviza · · Score: 1

    oh yea, like the backgrounder app I've had on my iphone since I bought it and jailbroke it (a week later) over a year ago.

    Sounds like iPhone OS4 is jailbroken OS3, with some restrictions.

    --
    Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
  161. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by WilyCoder · · Score: 1

    Rhetorical question: is your Android's ability to run 3-5 apps without slowdown related to the Android having better hardware than the 2 year old iPhone 3g?

  162. Re:well, sorta by mqduck · · Score: 1

    I disapprove of what you say, but I would defend to the death your right to say it against abusive moderators if I had any mod points.

    Seriously, I don't find the arguments in Mr. Coward's comment very convincing either, but you have to know that you're abusing the system when you mod this perfectly polite post down as "Flamebait" just because you disagree with it, so why do it?

    --
    Property is theft.
  163. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by mqduck · · Score: 1

    Jobs said iPhone 4.0 will be available for the iPhone 3G S and third-generation iPod touches by summer and for the iPad by fall. The iPhone 3G and older iPod touches will get some of the new features but will be left out of the multitasking fun.

    You know, you have to sincerely wonder... Jobs has to be fully aware that he's purposely giving fewer of the new features to users of a slightly older model entirely to encourage a few of them to purchase a new phone they wouldn't have otherwise. Wasn't he once young and sincerely idealistic when he started a funky little computer company? Does he ever feel brief pangs of guilt for being such a greedy asshole now?

    --
    Property is theft.
  164. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But the specs of the Milestone are similar to those of the 3GS, not the 3G, with 256MB of RAM.

  165. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Americano · · Score: 1

    Nokia likes linux folks like us.

    I think you mean:

    Nokia likes making money off linux folks like us.

    It's all marketing, friend. They simply use your platform of choice, which - surprise surprise - you approve of. If they thought it would sell more devices, they'd lock stuff down as far as they could in a new york second. But, since they get a mobile OS that's free, they can increase their margins and attract some customers who disapprove of a more locked down approach.

    Or did you really think that Nokia chooses Linux because it wants to be your chum?

  166. Android Market Share Gains On The iPhone by farble1670 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/05/comscore-android-market-share-continues-to-gain-on-the-iphone/

    "But the most interesting story is the rapid rise of Android, whose share grew 5.2%. Apple’s share has remained stable, with a .1% drop."

  167. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iPhone slows to a crawl regardless....

    I'd reboot my phone, use a few apps (mostly default Apple apps) and find that within 10 minutes my iPhone was crawling, & freezing. At least after jailbreaking, I can access a memory tool to free up memory.

    (It sucked, when Apple pulled the free memory tools. I was rebooting 4-5 times a day.)

  168. Simple, simple, simple solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Check box to allow multi-tasking or not.

    Two different power users. One for battery, and one for application. Why not just allow the individual owner to choose which mode they want their phone to operate in, eh?

    --

    Oh, my iPhone is far more powerful than my old 386DX33. It multi-tasked. :P

  169. For the love of papervision by SaintAimless · · Score: 1

    You know, the HTML5 ability to deliver browser-rendered 3D, lets say, via X3D (using WebGL and Javascript) is kinda retarded compared to Flash's Papervision. The iPad would be the perfect interface for a papervision flash site like... www.tittybingo.com. I think apple wants absolute control over media. Its too bad. That desire for control always ascends to tyranny. And then rebellion, a brief period of freedom followed by the process repeating itself.

  170. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    he is right.
    iphone os is a premptive multitasking operating system based on unix.
    there is no reason other than a craptastic scheduler why they can't make multitasking work without going through such crazy amounts of effort

  171. Why this is really bad by weston · · Score: 1

    The *biggest* problem I see with this change is that is that it goes beyond forbidding tools that do their own compiling/linking at the final stage of a build. That's still pretty weird and annoying, but it's not the most onerous thing, and hey, anybody who's building their own tool targeting the iPhone would probably be well served to re-use as much of the open source tools that do the actual build process behind the scenes as possible.

    No, the horrible thing here is... you apparently can't even target C, Objective C, or C++ code as an intermediary and then have *Apple's* tools produce your final output. That last part is indefensible even under the cloak of quality assurance -- the only worry with this kind of arrangement is about the quality of the code that goes into the XCode toolchain, and it's as big a worry if programmers write it by hand than if a programmer writes a program to generate it.

    Apple is essentially telling developers it doesn't want them to use or build tools that make them more productive. Read this article by James Long:

      http://jlongster.com/blog/2010/04/09/scheme-dead-iphone/

    Particularly this quote:

    "this is what programming is all about. We shouldn't be thinking within the bounds of our current tools; we should be wondering how we can use our tools to construct new tools that serve us better. Apple's recent changes forbid this kind of thinking."

    This is also something new. This is potentially Apple's very first genuinely anticompetitive market-power abuse. People have made all kinds of noise about iTMS and DRM and the iPod but there's always been a pretty high degree of choice, there's always been an escape hatch to use what you've bought from Apple in some other way. This action may be their very first real sin on this front, and it's pretty troubling.

    I'm not saying this as some anti-fanboi of the stripe who thinks the moronic observation "Apple is a fashion company" is deeply insightful comment. If you look at my comment history you'll find I've defended Apple in a lot of discussions. I still think a lot of their products have real merits. But the part of this license change that stipulates the "original" language code has to be written in is just indefensible.

    I'm not saying this as some antifanboi. If you go through my comment history, you can find all kinds of comments where I defend Apple's product decisions and call out morons who somehow think that the statement "Apple is a fashion company" is insightful. I like a lot of their products. I even like XCode and Objective C.

  172. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by sznupi · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, what? What Apple intruduced isn't even full multitasking, doesn't put that much of a strain on CPU & RAM. Besides, other platforms could multitask just fine for a long time, om much more modest hardware...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  173. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by sznupi · · Score: 1

    Rhetorical question: is my old Nokia E50 (211 MHz or so ARM11, 20 MB user ram) ability to run 3-5 apps without slowdown related to magic?

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  174. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by sznupi · · Score: 1

    So...open sourcing Symbian or making Qt really free is also marketing?...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  175. Re:And if you have anything except an iPhone 3GS.. by sznupi · · Score: 1

    I wonder, can you give a quick answer how complete is tricking 3G into thinking it's 3GS? Do also the features that officially the hardware doesn't support, like video recording, suddenly work?

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  176. Re:well, sorta by macsimcon · · Score: 1

    During the demonstration, Scott Forstall indicated that apps in the background enter a "quiescent state, using no CPU" on the device. How is this multitasking? Apple is completely suspending any background apps, while allowing only specific background processes (local notification, location, audio, etc.) to run. For example, I'd like Tweetie to download tweets in the background, or NetNewsWire to download articles in the background. From the presentation, it looks like the only way this could occur in the background is for me to launch the app, manually begin downloading data, and then exit to some other app or the task manager. If those apps utilize the task completion feature in OS 4, they'll finish on their own. That's OK, but I'd much rather have them downloading that data at predetermined intervals, like a mail client does. If we had true multitasking, those apps would actually be running in the background, and could do this. On a totally unrelated note, how do we quit apps in the new task manager? Hold down the icon until we get an "x" in the upper left corner of the icon? I didn't see any differentiation in the presentation between switching and app and closing an app.

  177. Forvever by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    For an iPhone, yes, right now you can jailbreak it. But how about later?

    Once you have jailbroken it, you are done.

    It's possible that Apple might come out with an update you would like, but that's beside the point. Jailbreaking lets you do anything, right now, and forever after.

    Jailbreaking is a pretty cool achievement, but it's something that exists thanks to volunteers that could at any time find something more exciting to do.

    Which (besides being extremely unlikley) does not matter, because you have already jailbroken it.

    That only matters if you want to keep up with Apple updates, which is not totally necessary (there are still a significant number of Touch users running 2.0 for example, even on non-jailbroken devices).

    When you discuss what a device can do, the discussion is what you can do as long as you own the device. The base software plus the ability to jailbreak offers a known quantity against which you can judge.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  178. another me-too product from Apple by pydev · · Score: 1

    In-app ads are nothing new; most other platforms have them.

    What is new is that Apple is trying to grab this market for themselves instead of leaving the choice up to the application developers.

    1. Re:another me-too product from Apple by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      What is new is that Apple is trying to grab this market for themselves instead of leaving the choice up to the application developers.

      You really should read more about the topic.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  179. Full of Godwin by Tokerat · · Score: 1

    So because many people will go along with something and will not oppose it on principle, and therefore precedent for it exists, that automatically means it's not exploitative and is not an instance of double-dipping?

    You know, there was another something that people went along with and didn't oppose it on principal until it was too late.

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?