• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

*** Official iPad 2 Launch Thread and other things announced on 3/2/11 ***

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
runawayprisoner said:
That's what I get for getting involved in manufacturing jobs... "overstocking" is just stuck in my head as I'm reminded every day of its consequences.

But to be honest, from my view, it means Apple is buying all of the parts that other manufacturers could use in their devices. And... that's the dark side of things. When something is out of stock, there is a friggin' couple of weeks (months even) of lead time on certain parts that will delay production for other manufacturers beyond any reasonable scope. It also disrupts their schedules, and it just totally messes everything. Plus it's not like they get away with paying fee during the idle time, so... imagine you have to pay for several months of idle time, without any progress. It can amount to millions easily. So manufacturers need to plan ahead and buy these parts ASAP even if they are not needed for anything. It's a rush to get components.

From a consumer's standpoint, this is a good thing because it keeps manufacturers and Apple competing with each other to rush better products out of the doors. From a manufacturer's standpoint, Apple just looks like a big bully.
Click to expand...
There is no conspiracy. Apple is not buying up parts. I've just shown that there are many suppliers in this industry and there isn't even a peep of Apple hoarding parts. It's ridiculous for people to speculate on this. If they were we'd see it in price movements and angry manufacturers. Also, the iPad came out in January of 2010. It's only been a year and developers and manufacturers have had to, for the most part, go back to the drawing boards in order to compete. R&D takes time. Getting all the people to work on a project takes time. That is why it has taken so long to see tablets from other manufacturers.
 
Of course I'm not suggesting that to be the case, but it's still the worst case scenario, and it may still happen to certain parts that only have one supplier.

Trust me, that happens on a regular basis. Sometimes there is just this one part from this one supplier that you just can't get anywhere else, and not being able to get your hands on it means either your R&D time or production time or both get affected.

Going back to the boards and redraw things to accommodate a replacement part is also very tedious.
 
runawayprisoner said:
If you'll let me be frank, this is completely untrue on so many levels. And I'm seriously getting tired of people assuming that this is to be the case mindlessly.

Background tasks are not completely halted. Developers can choose to queue a task to complete in the background on iOS. More information here:

http://developer.apple.com/library/.../BackgroundExecution/BackgroundExecution.html

In case you are too lazy to check it out:



Which means that if an app supports it, you can set it to do a custom filter on your super high resolution photo while you go and browse websites in the mean time. When you switch back into the app, it'll either show you how far it has gotten in the filtering process, or it'll show you the result. The task is never stopped until it has finished processing or until the execution time is up. This works on all devices that support multitasking.

I don't blame you for not knowing since not even all developers care to read everything. But please at least try to find out if something is true before making statements...
Click to expand...

I think you're the one who needs to do a little more research there buddy. I'm not lazy. I'm opinionated and can be pigheaded at times but I usually try to research what I write. That doesn't mean I'm always right but I do at least try to be informed and I do try to see things from all sides. It doesn't mean anyone will agree with me and again, it definitely doesn't guarantee I'm right. But I do try to stay informed about what I write.

I stand by my original post.That's because outside of a few specific tasks, you are not allowed to multitask on an iOS device.

The allowed multitasking tasks are:

  1. Background audio
  2. Voice over IP
  3. Background location
  4. Push notifications
  5. Local notifications
  6. Task finishing
  7. Fast app switching

The example you gave is something you can do on Xoom (assuming someone makes the appropriate app). But it is not currently possible on iOS. Now, in the post you quoted me I said that outside of a few special functions which as I now list is background audio, voip, background location, and notifications. Basically you can have an app streaming or playing music while you do something else. You can have a GPS app still running in the background while you do something else. And apps can receive notifications.

If you're doing something that is going to end quickly, iOS will let you finish it when you switch apps but that's it. If I'm rendering a movie in the background, it's going to get halted. If as you say I'm applying a filter to an image, it better be done quickly or it's going to get halted.

Keep in mind that I've already stated that app switching and limited multitasking is completely fine on a smartphone. I'm not going to be doing anything but the most minor picture editing. I'm never going to be editing or transcoding video or audio. I'm not going to be crunching numbers in a spreadsheet. However, on a tablet, it becomes a limitation. Now I might be doing something that requires a few minutes to complete and that I would like to switch to something like a web browser while the task completes in the background.
 
Narmer said:
Apple is too stingy of a company to do something like that. What you are talking about isn't what happened. What happened in 2004 or 2005 was Samsung screwing over their Korean MP3 customers in order to supply Apple with as much NAND chip as they want. In reality, there are many manufacturers of NAND chips for other tablet makers to go to. They can buy from Samsung, Toshiba, Hynix, Elpida, Infenion, Intel, AMD, etc... As for chips they can go to TI, Samsung, Qualcomm, etc... As for displays, they can go to Samsung, LG, Toshiba, Sony, Sharp, Fujitsu, etc... You get the picture? There is no hoarding. If there was, you guys would be hearing about price increases in these different supplies. I haven't.
Click to expand...

From what I understand, Apple paid money to buy the NAND memory ahead of time. In other words Apple essentially pre-ordered the NAND RAM. Samsung accepted the order, signed the contract and that was that. Then when the time period came to deliver, everyone else found out Samsung had very very low availability because they had already promised it all to Apple.

This was the same thing that happened with micro sized hard drives when Apple first released their iPod way back when MP3 players were just starting out. Every other company could have did the same thing. Apple is doing it again with their recent $3.9 billion dollar purchase of mystery parts for future products. The speculation is that the Apple cornered 60% of the next two year's worth of LCD panels for tablets.
 
runawayprisoner said:
Of course I'm not suggesting that to be the case, but it's still the worst case scenario, and it may still happen to certain parts that only have one supplier.

Trust me, that happens on a regular basis. Sometimes there is just this one part from this one supplier that you just can't get anywhere else, and not being able to get your hands on it means either your R&D time or production time or both get affected.

Going back to the boards and redraw things to accommodate a replacement part is also very tedious.
Click to expand...
But that is not what's happening here, with Apple in particular and tablets in general. There is nothing special about the parts Apple uses and, as I've already shown, there are many suppliers.
 
akugami said:
From what I understand, Apple paid money to buy the NAND memory ahead of time. In other words Apple essentially pre-ordered the NAND RAM. Samsung accepted the order, signed the contract and that was that. Then when the time period came to deliver, everyone else found out Samsung had very very low availability because they had already promised it all to Apple.

This was the same thing that happened with micro sized hard drives when Apple first released their iPod way back when MP3 players were just starting out. Every other company could have did the same thing. Apple is doing it again with their recent $3.9 billion dollar purchase of mystery parts for future products. The speculation is that the Apple cornered 60% of the next two year's worth of LCD panels for tablets.
Click to expand...
Even if that was true, Samsung is/was not the only manufacturer of those products. There were others. Also, Apple secured supplies, they did not conspire to crowd out competitors. Those are two very different things.
 
akugami said:
The example you gave is something you can do on Xoom (assuming someone makes the appropriate app). But it is not currently possible on iOS. Now, in the post you quoted me I said that outside of a few special functions which as I now list is background audio, voip, background location, and notifications. Basically you can have an app streaming or playing music while you do something else. You can have a GPS app still running in the background while you do something else. And apps can receive notifications.

If you're doing something that is going to end quickly, iOS will let you finish it when you switch apps but that's it. If I'm rendering a movie in the background, it's going to get halted. If as you say I'm applying a filter to an image, it better be done quickly or it's going to get halted.

Keep in mind that I've already stated that app switching and limited multitasking is completely fine on a smartphone. I'm not going to be doing anything but the most minor picture editing. I'm never going to be editing or transcoding video or audio. I'm not going to be crunching numbers in a spreadsheet. However, on a tablet, it becomes a limitation. Now I might be doing something that requires a few minutes to complete and that I would like to switch to something like a web browser while the task completes in the background.
Click to expand...

End quickly is not the right way to put it. Any task can ask for up to 10 minutes to complete its task. And 10 minutes is not "quickly".

If you are going to leave the app briefly for less than 10 minutes (or a few minutes as you said), then come back, you'll still have your task running. You just can't expect to leave it there for an hour and come back to see it still running.

Again, please do more reading. I don't think you have done enough. It's true that there are limitations in iOS multitasking, but they are all well within reasons and not as limited as you are trying to make them out to be. You are assuming that apps only have a few seconds to finish their tasks, but that's simply not the case.
 
runawayprisoner said:
End quickly is not the right way to put it. Any task can ask for up to 10 minutes to complete its task. And 10 minutes is not "quickly".

If you are going to leave the app briefly for less than 10 minutes (or a few minutes as you said), then come back, you'll still have your task running. You just can't expect to leave it there for an hour and come back to see it still running.

Again, please do more reading. I don't think you have done enough. It's true that there are limitations in iOS multitasking, but they are all well within reasons and not as limited as you are trying to make them out to be. You are assuming that apps only have a few seconds to finish their tasks, but that's simply not the case.
Click to expand...

First, I would never ever attempt to do anything that processor intensive on a phone sized device, that's why I said it doesn't matter to me on my iPhone.

Second, if you switch apps and run out of RAM (definitely a case where more is better) it will suspend your app or even close it. If you're running anything that takes minutes to finish, it's usually a program that needs more RAM (Photoshop, video editing, audio editing, etc.). Switch apps and you're just as likely to have your app close as have the task finish.

What you say in theory may sound fine but in practice this pseudo multitasking is not suitable for tablet devices. For stuff like finishing downloading a web page the way the iOS devices currently multitask is fine. For serious work it isn't going to cut it for those who truly need it.
 
akugami said:
First, I would never ever attempt to do anything that processor intensive on a phone sized device, that's why I said it doesn't matter to me on my iPhone.

Second, if you switch apps and run out of RAM (definitely a case where more is better) it will suspend your app or even close it. If you're running anything that takes minutes to finish, it's usually a program that needs more RAM (Photoshop, video editing, audio editing, etc.). Switch apps and you're just as likely to have your app close as have the task finish.

What you say in theory may sound fine but in practice this pseudo multitasking is not suitable for tablet devices. For stuff like finishing downloading a web page the way the iOS devices currently multitask is fine. For serious work it isn't going to cut it for those who truly need it.
Click to expand...

You still don't get it...

Once a task completion request is granted, the kernel will not force the task to close to get more memory.

You are thinking of task completion as something on the same level as app suspending, but it's not. If task completion is requested and the kernel grants it, the app running it can keep running for the amount of time that it asks, all the way up to 10 minutes. It won't be forced to close because of low memory signals.

If the app is closed when you get back, it likely doesn't support task completion, or its task completion request to the kernel was denied in the first place.

And don't make the mistake of thinking task completion is coded in every app by default. The developer has to add support for it properly before it can work. Only a handful of apps support it, and it's usually used for saving and restoring information from the storage since the storage may take longer to record changes.
 
runawayprisoner said:
You still don't get it...

Once a task completion request is granted, the kernel will not force the task to close to get more memory.

You are thinking of task completion as something on the same level as app suspending, but it's not. If task completion is requested and the kernel grants it, the app running it can keep running for the amount of time that it asks, all the way up to 10 minutes. It won't be forced to close because of low memory signals.

If the app is closed when you get back, it likely doesn't support task completion, or its task completion request to the kernel was denied in the first place.

And don't make the mistake of thinking task completion is coded in every app by default. The developer has to add support for it properly before it can work. Only a handful of apps support it, and it's usually used for saving and restoring information from the storage since the storage may take longer to record changes.
Click to expand...

Ok. I didn't want to say it in your other post but stop with the condescending tone. That's annoying. If someone makes a mistake, and they're genuinely not trying to troll, you don't have to be condescending. The "you just don't get it" comments have overtones of me being too stupid to understand what you're saying. I guarantee that there are plenty of subjects that I am much more knowledgeable than you.

You can try to say I don't get it till you're blue in the face but the fact is iOS does not have the necessary multitasking capabilities that would be needed in a work tablet. Early crashing aside, which I'm sure they'll fix in an update, Honeycomb is the better tablet if you need multitasking.

Just because an app requests that it be allowed to continue operating in the background doesn't mean iOS will grant the request. If RAM is running short because you're running something else in the foreground, it's going to suspend apps in the background or even terminate them. That's one way how iOS keeps things running smooth and battery life high. Kill every other task except what is immediately in front of the user. Not to mention all background tasks are lower on the priority level.

Keep in mind that iOS will rarely not grant a Task Completion request because most developers are smart enough to realize that it was never meant to be used for heavy multitasking as you tried to say in your original post that started this whole conversation. But if you were to try to have a "heavy" task in the background watch how fast that changes.

Task Completion was never meant as a multitasking API. It was meant to allow certain tasks to complete without you needed to stare at it. Examples include having an app download and sync your email to your iOS device while you switch to a web browser or perhaps check your calender. It was never meant to allow heavy tasks to complete in the background. If it did, we'd have the same issue as with Android devices slowing down due to background processes and Apple is not going to mess with the user experience.

Apple's philosophy with iOS has always been user experience and not power performance. Everyone needs to understand that. And as an owner of an iPhone 4, I understand what this limitation means. Maybe iOS 5 will allow better multitasking but for now, multitasking sucks on the iOS devices. It's basically app switching while suspending the one in the background.
 
If "you still don't get it" sounds condescending, which I honestly don't think it does, then I apologize, but I am not trying to be superior. I am trying to explain to you how something works, which you are assuming it doesn't.

When an app goes from the foreground state to background, of course... it can directly influence the amount of memory free since it was the last application to have priority over memory usage. The next factor is how much memory the app that is being switched to the foreground will ask for. So if the background app freed up enough memory for the next app to launch without asking for more, the request will be granted. Unless you are trying to edit a photo while running a 3D game, it's not likely that a low memory condition will occur and block the task completion request. This will only get better as iOS gets more memory to play with.

Next is... none of the current apps on either iOS or Honeycomb will feature such "heavy" tasks as you have noted. There is no 3D modeling app for Honeycomb. There is no photo editing app for Honeycomb. There is no movie editing app for Honeycomb. There is no music studio app for Honeycomb. There is just... nothing that will do tasks heavier than downloading/uploading stuffs or applying image filters on these devices. It's just not happening.

So right now, and I mean... no theory, no speculation, no projection, just fact, and fact is... iOS multitasking does things just about on par with Honeycomb, and there are more things you can do on iOS than on Honeycomb. Add iMovie and GarageBand to the mix and it's easy to see how much more iPad 2 can do than the XOOM, multitasking or not.

Lack of software stability is not the issue with the XOOM. It just simply... lacks everything related to software. If you want to go into productivity, then there are more apps that can do a lot more on iOS than on Honeycomb, even if you can't have them run automated tasks in the background. A pretty interface, widgets, and convenient multitasking don't help much when there is nothing else that can help you do your tasks on the device.
 
Last edited:
iPad doesn't have Flash. I'll take ability to view all the sites I can view on my PC over garage band. That's just me, maybe if I was in an actual garage band, I'd have different priorities. For video editor, youtube has a free online one.
 
The fact of the matter is that tablets are view by consumers as CE devices not computers.

Consumers expect CE devices to 'just work'.
The iPad with iOS just works.
 
Patranus said:
The fact of the matter is that tablets are view by consumers as CE devices not computers.

Consumers expect CE devices to 'just work'.
The iPad with iOS just works.
Click to expand...

and what tablets don't just work? The Xoom is the only tablet recently released that has been buggy. You always hear Apple fans say this about all Apple products but I don't understand because if you say consumers want something that "just works" then why are not all Apple products not #1?
 
senseamp said:
iPad doesn't have Flash. I'll take ability to view all the sites I can view on my PC over garage band. That's just me, maybe if I was in an actual garage band, I'd have different priorities. For video editor, youtube has a free online one.
Click to expand...

After 2 years of using an iPhone I've only felt limited by lack of flash a handful of times
 
zerocool84 said:
and what tablets don't just work? The Xoom is the only tablet recently released that has been buggy. You always hear Apple fans say this about all Apple products but I don't understand because if you say consumers want something that "just works" then why are not all Apple products not #1?
Click to expand...

because apple products cost a fuckload of money?
 
senseamp said:
If you have to use Skyfire, and run it remotely it doesn't "just work."
That's like saying Windows "just works" on iPad because you can VNC into your Windows machine.
Click to expand...

What do you mean run it remotely? It's an app. I rather not play flash videos that would drain my battery life otherwise.
 
senseamp said:
iPad doesn't have Flash. I'll take ability to view all the sites I can view on my PC over garage band. That's just me, maybe if I was in an actual garage band, I'd have different priorities. For video editor, youtube has a free online one.
Click to expand...

iMovie is much more powerful than Youtube free online editor. Plus it can export to more than just Youtube.

iPad has Skyfire or Cloud Browse, both of which can view Flash contents just fine. Skyfire uses a pass-through server to render Flash videos so it doesn't work with every site, though it works with most regular websites. Cloud Browse uses a more advanced remote-desktop solution to allow you to control a computer remotely, which has an ultra-fast internet connection for less disruption while viewing, and it's faster at streaming than VNC, which is more geared towards response, and doesn't support audio streaming for the most part (unless you want to pay).

Last but not least, most popular video hosting services now have a version of their player for the iPad that doesn't need Flash. Youtube is out of the question, but Vimeo, DailyMotion and etc... do have a service that allows direct viewing of their video contents on the iPad.

Beyond that, iPad has Netflix, Hulu, and specialized movie streaming services apps that cater to international TV streaming (live), ESPN3, and etc... which the XOOM doesn't have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top