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

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

runawayprisoner

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2008
2,496
0
76
Did you guys even read Anand's review? http://www.anandtech.com/show/4191/motorola-xoom-review-first-honeycomb-tablet-arrives

The Xoom is appealing because it lets you be more productive, i.e. it's much, much easier to multitask. I don't want a device that's really good at doing one thing at a time. I don't work like that on my computer or on my phone, so why is that a good idea for a tablet?

The iPad can multitask. What's with the implication that it can't?

You exit the app normally, then you go back and it's finished the task you left it with, or it picks up where you left off. If you keep it playing music, it'll keep playing music as you work in other things. If you leave it to downloading stuffs, it'll download stuffs while you work on other things.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Yea but it's buggy. It still needs tweaks to the software. iOS still has lots of negatives though as it's not slick at multitasking and notifications suck but I'm sure they'll remedy the notification issue in June since they've had the WebOS guy that did the notifications for them for a while as it desperately needs that fixed.

Are you sure you aren't thinking about the WebOS guy that Google hired for Android?
http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/07/exclusive-interview-googles-matias-duarte-talks-honeycomb-tab/

If anything, I'd expect Android to become a lot more polished like WebOS over time.
 

disastar

Member
Jun 26, 2004
30
0
0
Yea but it's buggy. It still needs tweaks to the software. iOS still has lots of negatives though as it's not slick at multitasking and notifications suck but I'm sure they'll remedy the notification issue in June since they've had the WebOS guy that did the notifications for them for a while as it desperately needs that fixed.

The problems with Apple's implementation of multitasking go a lot deeper than just a shitty notification system. There is something I really don't understand about people who worship Apple: they seem to view embrace these small, almost entirely cosmetic improvements as revolutions. Thinner, lighter, and prettier are not revolutions. Android, however, is a revolution: it takes all the good things about iOS and keeps them, while dramatically improving all of the terrible things. Honeycomb is a further revolution that builds on both Android and iOS, and it truly brings tablet computing much, much closer to desktop computing.

Despite the above rant, I am an equal opportunity gadget owner. I will gladly give my money to any company that helps me work more efficiently. For now, that company is Google. If Apple surpasses Google, then I'll be buying their next device.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
The problems with Apple's implementation of multitasking go a lot deeper than just a shitty notification system. There is something I really don't understand about people who worship Apple: they seem to view embrace these small, almost entirely cosmetic improvements as revolutions. Thinner, lighter, and prettier are not revolutions. Android, however, is a revolution: it takes all the good things about iOS and keeps them, while dramatically improving all of the terrible things. Honeycomb is a further revolution that builds on both Android and iOS, and it truly brings tablet computing much, much closer to desktop computing.

Despite the above rant, I am an equal opportunity gadget owner. I will gladly give my money to any company that helps me work more efficiently. For now, that company is Google. If Apple surpasses Google, then I'll be buying their next device.

Well yes but like said before, every review and hands on I've read of the Xoom shows it's buggy software so that hurts it.
 
Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
The problems with Apple's implementation of multitasking go a lot deeper than just a shitty notification system. There is something I really don't understand about people who worship Apple: they seem to view embrace these small, almost entirely cosmetic improvements as revolutions. Thinner, lighter, and prettier are not revolutions. Android, however, is a revolution: it takes all the good things about iOS and keeps them, while dramatically improving all of the terrible things. Honeycomb is a further revolution that builds on both Android and iOS, and it truly brings tablet computing much, much closer to desktop computing.

Despite the above rant, I am an equal opportunity gadget owner. I will gladly give my money to any company that helps me work more efficiently. For now, that company is Google. If Apple surpasses Google, then I'll be buying their next device.

Honestly, it's not that bad.

The push notification system Apple implements is top notch. I don't see webOS or Android making much use of the push notifications. Without push notifications, Android keeps apps open. While this works fine for powerhouse devices like 512mb+ RAM phones, I can see it failing on my 256mb Droid. For example I've seen Meebo just quit on its own.

Apple has already pointed out that you only need multitasking in certain situations. While you may call this restrictive, it's pretty true. The multitasking you see on Android is roughly the same, and the only differences I see are that apps like SetCPU can run in the background.

But from a daily use standpoint like Pandora, navigation, social networking, web browsing, etc. iOS multitasking is more than sufficient. Until you can start getting multiple windows in say cascade mode or split screen mode, you really can only interact with 1 app at a time anyway.

No matter what it seems all our OSes has multitasking limitations. WebOS and Symbian might be the exceptions, but to me Android, and iOS are in the same boat in terms of limited multitasking. There's no reason to bitch about the other unless you put things into perspective against OSes with full blown multitasking.

I wouldnt' call Android as an OS that takes iOS's deficiences and improves on them. For example it might ahve brought copy and paste over, but the C&P of Android is absolute shit now. Android is really a separate thing and it's on its own track. The maturation of these OSes is just going down different paths. I wouldn't say any OS is really another OS done right.
 

akugami

Diamond Member
Feb 14, 2005
6,210
2,551
136
... when I say form factor of the Xoom, I'm referring to the dimensions of the rectangle, and the thickness of the bezel.

That's not form factor. Examples of form factors are the SFF or small form factor computer cases such as those made by shuttle. Then there are the candybar form factor for cell phones. The iPhone and Droid are examples of the slate form factor. Actual dimensions and design may differ but it follows a general size and shape. And from that standpoint, the original iPad was a very nice feeling device and the iPad 2 is said to be sleeker and lighter. I'd chalk design up to user preference. No advantage to either device.

I think you're confusing the issue here... the question is not... "Which tablet is best for the lowest common denominator?"... in terms of that there's no question the iPad is best. The question is "Which tablet is best for ME?"... I am not the lowest common denominator, and for me the Xoom in terms of hardware is Superior... not vastly superior... but it is Superior... the UI is vastly superior... the Apps are a wash... and the Media capabilities is vastly inferior.

Actually, I'm not confusing the issue. No matter how you look at it, the Xoom has only a slight edge in terms of hardware and physical specs at best. In terms of software the iPad 2 has a huge advantage. You yourself (not to mention others) talk about your devices hanging or crashing. That's not being superior. I know it's mincing words but superior implies the Xoom would be heads and tails better than the iPad 2. Meaning there is no question everyone but idiots should be buying the Xoom over the iPad 2. That is not even close to being the case.

The iPad 2 is at best only slightly lower in hardware and I do mean slightly while being ahead in software. In many cases, having better software can alleviate weaker hardware. Case in point, all of those higher clocked and higher benchmarking Android phones didn't mean the user interface was as smooth as that of an "inferior" iPhone. Not to mention I already showed why the lower RAM present in iOS devices actually is as good as having more RAM in Android devices. This is not saying iOS or Android is superior or inferior to the other, they just work differently. In this case, the way Android works necessitates more RAM than iOS for app switching.

Incidentally I looked at Anand's review of the Xoom and apparently the screen, while larger, is inferior to the original ipad's screen. I know you mentioned the larger panel size and higher resolution as a plus but the screen is not as good as an iPad 1's screen and presumably not as good as the iPad 2's screen. Now, it goes without saying that we need to see an actual review of the iPad 2's screen before we can make a judgment. Considering the similarity in size of the Xoom and iPad's screen, enough that it's difficult as I've said to notice without having them side by side, it comes down to who has the better quality screen rather than size.

Also of note is that while I've stated in the past that Flash is irrelevant on a phone to me, on a tablet device this is more important. This weighs in favor of Android since the iPad doesn't have Flash except if you jailbreak it and install a hacked version of Flash.

The iPad can multitask. What's with the implication that it can't?

You exit the app normally, then you go back and it's finished the task you left it with, or it picks up where you left off. If you keep it playing music, it'll keep playing music as you work in other things. If you leave it to downloading stuffs, it'll download stuffs while you work on other things.

For the most part, it's not true multitasking. Outside of a few special functions, when you switch to a different app, the ones in the background are completely halted. This is fine on a phone but not as good on a tablet. With a Honeycomb device, you can have tasks performing in the background while you do something else in the foreground.

Honestly, it's not that bad.

The push notification system Apple implements is top notch. I don't see webOS or Android making much use of the push notifications. Without push notifications, Android keeps apps open. While this works fine for powerhouse devices like 512mb+ RAM phones, I can see it failing on my 256mb Droid. For example I've seen Meebo just quit on its own.

Apple's push notification is functional. That's about it. It needs some improvement. I am not a fan of Apple's current notification system.

Apple has already pointed out that you only need multitasking in certain situations. While you may call this restrictive, it's pretty true. The multitasking you see on Android is roughly the same, and the only differences I see are that apps like SetCPU can run in the background.

The problem is in this case we're talking about tablets. It's ok on phones and I don't mind it. I think it's fine on my iPhone. But when we're talking about tablets, I think it needs full blown multi-tasking. Different device types, different design needs.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
I think Honeycomb is a better tablet interface concept than iOS, but from what I've seen from playing with it, it's still in beta state. iOS is a very 2D interface, basically same grid of icons we've had for 20 years with windows, just prettified and touchable. Essentially you are either looking at a grid of icons or one application.
Honeycomb desktop, with the widgets is much more multidimensional, there is different stuff going on, and you can sort of pan around and check things out, and then only when you decide to focus on something it becomes a full screen app. The actual desktop itself is useful beyond just being a way to launch applications.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
I think it has to do with Apple hoarding chipsets and memory and such. Pliablemoose talked about that they "invested" a ton of money into it and pretty much makes it cheaper for them and more expensive for everyone else to buy the same stuff.
Yeah, I'm sure they're making it harder for Samsung, the maker of the memory and chips, to make their own tabs at comparable prices:rolleyes:
 

runawayprisoner

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2008
2,496
0
76
For the most part, it's not true multitasking. Outside of a few special functions, when you switch to a different app, the ones in the background are completely halted. This is fine on a phone but not as good on a tablet. With a Honeycomb device, you can have tasks performing in the background while you do something else in the foreground.

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:

Any time before it is suspended, an application can call the beginBackgroundTaskWithExpirationHandler: method to ask the system for extra time to complete some long-running task in the background. If the request is granted, and if the application goes into the background while the task is in progress, the system lets the application run for an additional amount of time instead of suspending it. (The backgroundTimeRemaining property of the UIApplication object contains the amount of time the application has to run.)

You can use task completion to ensure that important but potentially long-running operations do not end abruptly when the user leaves the application. For example, you might use this technique to save user data to disk or finish downloading an important file from a network server. There are a couple of design patterns you can use to initiate such task

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...
 
Last edited:

DivideBYZero

Lifer
May 18, 2001
24,117
2
0
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. 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...

L my AO! That is not even slightly "Multitasking". It's task completion to prevent abrupt program closure causing errors, such as storage writes. Not only that, but I DID read your link and this section:

Because applications are given only a limited amount of time to finish background tasks, you must call this method before time expires or the system will terminate your application.

pretty much puts it into plain English. It states, "finish up quick or get hosed", not, "You get as long as you need x 1000". And your example wouldn't count anyway, as it's not an Audio, location or VOIP app.
 

runawayprisoner

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2008
2,496
0
76
It doesn't have to be an audio, location, or VOIP task. Those three are tasks that will have an infinite (or near infinite) execution time. Task completion can be anything, but it's time-limited.

Developers can request however long it takes to complete the task. It's just that the execution time may end before the task can complete, so it's required that the function be called again to prolong the execution time. But that doesn't mean you can't keep requesting more time to complete the task.

Please do some reading, or learn more English if that's too hard to understand.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
Yeah, I'm sure they're making it harder for Samsung, the maker of the memory and chips, to make their own tabs at comparable prices:rolleyes:

Hmm that's an interesting development, I didn't know Samsung was the only company that's trying to make competition in the tablet market.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
Hmm that's an interesting development, I didn't know Samsung was the only company that's trying to make competition in the tablet market.
Samsung is certainly the biggest outside of Apple yet they put their smaller and inferior tablets at price parity with the iPad. Why would they do that? Also, Apple buys their iPad LCDs from LG, not Samsung and they have a second supplier in Toshiba for NAND memory. All this talk about Apple "hoarding" supplies is nonsense. It's quite obvious that Apple's stores and services, in addition to them having full control of the production of their products, allows them to price their products accordingly. The other manufacturers just have that one sale and it's mainly over. Apple has accessories and services. Of course, economies of scale allows them to get better deals on supplies, but there is no hoarding.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
Samsung is certainly the biggest outside of Apple yet they put their smaller and inferior tablets at price parity with the iPad. Why would they do that? Also, Apple buys their iPad LCDs from LG, not Samsung and they have a second supplier in Toshiba for NAND memory. All this talk about Apple "hoarding" supplies is nonsense. It's quite obvious that Apple's stores and services, in addition to them having full control of the production of their products, allows them to price their products accordingly. The other manufacturers just have that one sale and it's mainly over. Apple has accessories and services. Of course, economies of scale allows them to get better deals on supplies, but there is no hoarding.

What's funny is that some of your fellow Apple people were the ones that made that article here a few months ago of them doing that not me. It wasn't even my idea but ok think what you want.

Anyways, that was a couple pages ago and we already talked about it. We're on new subjects now.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
What's funny is that some of your fellow Apple people were the ones that made that article here a few months ago of them doing that not me. It wasn't even my idea but ok think what you want.

Anyways, that was a couple pages ago and we already talked about it. We're on new subjects now.
It doesn't matter who the source is, it's still nonsense. Also, I'm not a fan of Apple products because of one thing---iTunes. Finally, my point is that Apple has 1) tighter control of their costs 2) huge economies where they use the same supplies across multiple lines and 3) they make a lot of money off services (iTunes, App Store, etc...) and accessories. These are what allow them to have better prices than their competitors.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
It doesn't matter who the source is, it's still nonsense. Also, I'm not a fan of Apple products because of one thing---iTunes. Finally, my point is that Apple has 1) tighter control of their costs 2) huge economies where they use the same supplies across multiple lines and 3) they make a lot of money off services (iTunes, App Store, etc...) and accessories. These are what allow them to have better prices than their competitors.

They have more cash at hand so they can buy as many chips as possible to tighten up the supply for their competitors. It's not the first time they've done it and it won't be their last. It's in their best interest to do that.
 

runawayprisoner

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2008
2,496
0
76
Or another way to look at it is they are buying excess parts so that they can stock up on iPhone and iPod Touch production. Unlike other manufacturers who probably have one or two devices on the same platform with the same hardware, Apple has the iPad, the iPhone, and iPod Touch, and their prototypes for the next year count as well. That means Apple always needs a large amount of parts for these devices, and they can take the risk of overstocking parts, unlike other manufacturers.
 

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
Or another way to look at it is they are buying excess parts so that they can stock up on iPhone and iPod Touch production. Unlike other manufacturers who probably have one or two devices on the same platform with the same hardware, Apple has the iPad, the iPhone, and iPod Touch, and their prototypes for the next year count as well. That means Apple always needs a large amount of parts for these devices, and they can take the risk of overstocking parts, unlike other manufacturers.

You said it better than I did. I'm a dorky Android user that doesn't know how to speak to people.
 

Narmer

Diamond Member
Aug 27, 2006
5,292
0
0
They have more cash at hand so they can buy as many chips as possible to tighten up the supply for their competitors. It's not the first time they've done it and it won't be their last. It's in their best interest to do that.
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.
 

DivideBYZero

Lifer
May 18, 2001
24,117
2
0
It doesn't have to be an audio, location, or VOIP task. Those three are tasks that will have an infinite (or near infinite) execution time. Task completion can be anything, but it's time-limited.

Developers can request however long it takes to complete the task. It's just that the execution time may end before the task can complete, so it's required that the function be called again to prolong the execution time. But that doesn't mean you can't keep requesting more time to complete the task.

Please do some reading, or learn more English if that's too hard to understand.

LOL, are you for real? You're the one that thinks mutitasking means extending one app event until it completes. The very fact that you need to define a task as needing more time, rather than the OS handling resource should be a pretty blatant clue for you that it's not really mutitasking. The method you're getting so excited about is like letting one instrument in an orchestra play on when the curtain falls. He gets to finish the the score, but it's a poor rendition.

Maybe you need to read up on how a mutiltasking OS should allocate resource:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_multitasking
 

runawayprisoner

Platinum Member
Apr 2, 2008
2,496
0
76
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.

LOL, are you for real? You're the one that thinks mutitasking means extending one app event until it completes. The very fact that you need to define a task as needing more time, rather than the OS handling resource should be a pretty blatant clue for you that it's not really mutitasking. The method you're getting so excited about is like letting one instrument in an orchestra play on when the curtain falls. He gets to finish the the score, but it's a poor rendition.

Maybe you need to read up on how a mutiltasking OS should allocate resource:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_multitasking

You don't seem to get it, do you?

Multitasking to the end user means they get to do multitple tasks at the same time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_multitasking

What you are referring to is computer multitasking, which is a different concept to how Apple is implementing it.

The way Apple does it is that a user can still accomplish multiple tasks at the same time without any disruption. It doesn't matter what the underlying concept is, as long as the user can still background a running task and it can still complete while something else is running in the foreground.

Also Apple's method of process polling for execution time is better from a performance standpoint because the process knows better than the kernel when it can finish its task. When the task is finished, the app can be suspended, giving memory and CPU time for other processes.

With Apple's way, no background process will run away and start causing performance degradation, as the kernel will shut down any process not responding or not asking for more time.
 
Last edited: