There is an article written by John Gruber at Daring Fireball on why apple changed section 3.3.1 that can be read at http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/why_apple_changed_section_331.
Mihai On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 1:26 AM, chris0101 <[email protected]> wrote: > It appears to be a substantial upgrade over the iPhone OS 3. However, > did you see Apple's new terms? You can't use 3rd party environments > like MonoTouch anymore. Plus, there are rumours that it is even more > restrictive than before (no doubt part of Apple's war on > jailbreaking). > > > http://techcrunch.com/2010/04/10/steve-jobs-responds-to-iphone-sdk-complaints-intermediate-layers-produce-sub-standard-apps/ > > It's a step forward in functionality, but in openess, it is another > step-backwards. Android has been and in some ways still is playing > catch-up with the iPhone, but it is leading on others. I think right > now, it's not clear who is going to be > on top. For the sake of openess though, let's hope Android dominates. > > To CB: > > Yes, it should have a task manager, or system monitor, which after all > is derived from the Mac OS X and its BSD/OpenSTEP, which does as well. > I knew someone from Apple who had special "developer phones" that > essentially give the same privileges that the jailbroken phones have. > (Of course, he had signed NDAs and probably risked his job to tell me > that, so he couldn't tell me more). Multitasking in a sense has been > around and there were no real technical barriers to it being > implemented since 2007. > > To All: > > Does it need multitasking? Open to debate. We know after all that the > iPhone is geared so that even the least technically proficient people > should be able to grasp it. If you want to build a phone that can gear > to such an audience, perhaps it shouldn't be on the list of > priorities. > > > > On Apr 9, 5:45 pm, Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Apr 8, 7:54 pm, CB <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > While I agree that the iPhone multitasking is limited to those seven > > > types (or options), I have thought a lot and can't think of really any > > > background apps that would not be covered. > > > > A relatively simple one: download some files. > > > > A user is going to be bored if they have to keep an app in the > > foreground and watch the progress bar to complete a long download. > > > > Maybe this is covered by number 6, maybe not. > > > > "6. Task Completion > > This may be the most interesting trick of all. According to Apple, > > Task Completion lets programs finish arbitrary items in the background > > - uploading photos, for instance. The main restriction seems to be > > that the app needs to start the action while it's in the foreground." > > > > If number 6 is as broad as it seems, what isn't covered by #6? > > > > Windows Phone 7 seems to be going down the same path for multitasking, > > or perhaps a slightly different scenario where only Microsoft apps can > > be trusted to multitask. > > > > Nathan > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Android Discuss" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<android-discuss%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
