Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iPad multi-tasking solution

E

EssentialParado

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 17, 2005
1,162
48
We all realize that multi-tasking is not as simple as putting as putting it into the device. There are problems with managing the open apps, how to switch between them, and the large potential to forget about apps running in the background and being a drain on battery life.

I've seen people throwing ideas of 3-finger gestures to switch apps, cumbersome docks, etc. But I haven't seen a real solution that fits with Apple's "keep it simple and intuitive" philosophy; where even a child can understand interface.

So I had some thinking and came up with a possible suggestion on at least the interface side of things:

ipadmultitasking.jpg



I do understand this method would replace the current function where icons start jiggling around when an app is held for 2 seconds, but I feel that function can be repositioned to holding down the home button for 2 seconds instead.

I do think in any interface Apple uses, an App would need to pass certain performance targets to be qualified for multi-tasking use. For example, you're not going to want, or need to run a powerful game in multi-tasking mode. The potential for crashing the device for users seems too great to allow multi-tasking for all apps.
 
Y

yodaxl7

macrumors 6502a
Jan 25, 2010
768
0
Why not choose up to 5 apps and put them in a widget wheel. You can drag the apps into the wheel. From the wheel, you can select up to 5 apps to be open and toggle from the open apps using the wheel hook. You can close any app by tapping on the icon in the wheel. How about that?
 
E

EssentialParado

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 17, 2005
1,162
48
yodaxl7 said:
Why not choose up to 5 apps and put them in a widget wheel. You can drag the apps into the wheel. From the wheel, you can select up to 5 apps to be open and toggle from the open apps using the wheel hook. You can close any app by tapping on the icon in the wheel. How about that?
Click to expand...

I think the Apple litmus test is if a toddler and a grandma can use it. I don't know if your idea of a widget wheel would be completely natural to understand.

Also, why would you need to use five apps at once? Assuming the iPad can open and quit apps in the blink of an eye and their state is frozen and saved when you quit, there's no real reason to have multiple apps open. Two apps side-by-side, or music streaming app in the background I can see a valid need for, but not more than that.
 
Y

yodaxl7

macrumors 6502a
Jan 25, 2010
768
0
EssentialParado said:
I think the Apple litmus test is if a toddler and a grandma can use it. I don't know if your idea of a widget wheel would be completely natural to understand.

Also, why would you need to use five apps at once? Assuming the iPad can open and quit apps in the blink of an eye and their state is frozen and saved when you quit, there's no real reason to have multiple apps open. Two apps side-by-side, or music streaming app in the background I can see a valid need for, but not more than that.
Click to expand...

Well, I say up to 5 apps. Plus, it can be your quick assess to your favorite apps. Kinda like the dock at the bottom. You would highlight the ones you want to multi-task with.

I could listen to music. I can have the browser one side. I can have numbers from iwork next to it. I can have drug reference in the background and lastly a twitter in the other background.
 
S

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,779
41,982
USA
EssentialParado said:
I think the Apple litmus test is if a toddler and a grandma can use it. I don't know if your idea of a widget wheel would be completely natural to understand.

Also, why would you need to use five apps at once? Assuming the iPad can open and quit apps in the blink of an eye and their state is frozen and saved when you quit, there's no real reason to have multiple apps open. Two apps side-by-side, or music streaming app in the background I can see a valid need for, but not more than that.
Click to expand...

I love that you present a solution and then knock other people for offering their opinions/upgrade to the solution as if YOUR solution is the only one that can make sense. You should have quit while you were ahead and let others bounce ideas off of yours rather than playing the great dictator as to what would or wouldn't be necessary.
 
mrgreen4242

mrgreen4242

macrumors 601
Feb 10, 2004
4,377
9
There's no need for a multitasking "solution". You are making a problem out of a non-issue. There are countless ways to implement a multitasking interface, it's not a matter of IF it can be done, it's simply a matter of Apple actually doing it. In other words, trust me, they aren't waiting around for EssentialParado to come up with the multitasking UI before implementing it.
 
sassenach74

sassenach74

macrumors 65816
May 3, 2008
1,171
28
Spain
samcraig said:
I love that you present a solution and then knock other people for offering their opinions/upgrade to the solution as if YOUR solution is the only one that can make sense. You should have quit while you were ahead and let others bounce ideas off of yours rather than playing the great dictator as to what would or wouldn't be necessary.
Click to expand...

Eh? I don't know what you saw as a knock down in his/her reply?
It's called a conversation, to me they were bouncing ideas/opinions.
Any excuse to to get on the moral highground, alot of that going on just lately.
 
S

samcraig

macrumors P6
Jun 22, 2009
16,779
41,982
USA
sassenach74 said:
Eh? I don't know what you saw as a knock down in his/her reply?
It's called a conversation, to me they were bouncing ideas/opinions.
Any excuse to to get on the moral highground, alot of that going on just lately.
Click to expand...

Well to be fair - you lack the history of his posts prior to this one about the subject and the fact that he fails to see why multitasking is even an issue. Why anyone would need it. And as you can see reiterated here - why anyone would need more than 2 running at the same time.

He's entitled to his opinion and he can say that he only needs two apps running at once. But to assume that others wouldn't have or desire a need isn't exactly balanced.
 
W

wesrk

macrumors 6502a
Nov 4, 2007
660
1
I like the idea of holding on to an app for a longer to indicate that you want to run it together with something else, but why force it to go in one orientation, let it roam free, :D

I think we might be over thinking it. When and if, they do multitasking, it's probably going to be something very simple. Sure, you might end up having apps running in the background that you don't remember about, but you know what, that also happens when you're on any computer. Total user responsibility in the end.
 
Hankster

Hankster

macrumors 68020
Jan 30, 2008
2,475
440
Washington DC
There's a reason Apple doesn't want multitasking. It not like Apple doesn't know how to include it, they're not stupid. I know for a fact one reason for the lack of multitasking is battery life. The iPhone is a perfect example, if there was multitasking on the iPhone the battery would last less than 3 hours (bad enough already as it is).

Also, most applications open up fast enough you don't need multitasking.
 
sassenach74

sassenach74

macrumors 65816
May 3, 2008
1,171
28
Spain
samcraig said:
Well to be fair - you lack the history of his posts prior to this one about the subject and the fact that he fails to see why multitasking is even an issue. Why anyone would need it. And as you can see reiterated here - why anyone would need more than 2 running at the same time.

He's entitled to his opinion and he can say that he only needs two apps running at once. But to assume that others wouldn't have or desire a need isn't exactly balanced.
Click to expand...

Whatever, pointless discussing it, I can't be arsed with fighting about pointless ****, too much of that going on around here....it's really starting to wear thin.
 
ARF900

ARF900

macrumors 65816
Oct 30, 2009
1,119
0
Ive always dreamed of a corner drag style interface. You drag a box out of the top left corner and it shows you all running apps, to start a new app you drag out of the bottom right corner and select from non running apps. to quit an app you open the top left menu hold down the icon and press the little "X" just like on the iphone except that from that menu it just stops the app form running and doesnt delete it.
 
MattInOz

MattInOz

macrumors 68030
Jan 19, 2006
2,760
0
Sydney
Hankster said:
There's a reason Apple doesn't want multitasking. It not like Apple doesn't know how to include it, they're not stupid. I know for a fact one reason for the lack of multitasking is battery life. The iPhone is a perfect example, if there was multitasking on the iPhone the battery would last less than 3 hours (bad enough already as it is).

Also, most applications open up fast enough you don't need multitasking.
Click to expand...

I thought it was lack of memory, or more importantly the size of NIB files.
To keep and interfaced program open the NIB file has to stay in memory and takes a big chunk. As it stands the iPhone SDK discourage having too many NIBs open for memory reasons.

Without NIBs staying in memory then your not going to get fast app switching style multi-tasking only background processes.

I think they are waiting for their internal overhaul of Interface Builder to be complete. Would follow as to why Mac OS X hasn't the UI update we keep expecting each release with new graphics and resolution Independence, They have a full overhaul of that system planned.
 
hitekalex

hitekalex

macrumors 68000
Feb 4, 2008
1,624
0
Chicago, USA
EssentialParado said:
I haven't seen a real solution that fits with Apple's "keep it simple and intuitive" philosophy; where even a child can understand interface.

So I had some thinking and came up with a possible suggestion on at least the interface side of things
Click to expand...

Sorry to be blunt, but your solution is terrible. It's unintuitive, inelegant, inconsistent with the rest of UI, and inflexible (just 2 apps allowed to multitask.. huh?) I can only say I am glad you're not in charge of designing this.

Also.. there is already a thread discussing possible solutions to this issue. I am not sure what made you think your "solution" warrants its own thread.
 
thejakill

thejakill

macrumors 6502
Sep 8, 2005
401
0
i think they should just have the ipad default set to open ALL APPS ALL THE TIME. maybe that would stop some of the bitching.

but probably not.
 
E

EssentialParado

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Feb 17, 2005
1,162
48
samcraig said:
Well to be fair - you lack the history of his posts prior to this one about the subject and the fact that he fails to see why multitasking is even an issue. Why anyone would need it. And as you can see reiterated here - why anyone would need more than 2 running at the same time.
Click to expand...
Jee, you make it sound like I'm a holocaust denier. I just haven't seen a really good reason for having more than two apps open at any one time. Yes, I did post that question in the other thread — still waiting for a reply though! :)

hitekalex said:
Sorry to be blunt, but your solution is terrible. It's unintuitive, inelegant, inconsistent with the rest of UI, and inflexible (just 2 apps allowed to multitask.. huh?) I can only say I am glad you're not in charge of designing this.

Also.. there is already a thread discussing possible solutions to this issue. I am not sure what made you think your "solution" warrants its own thread.
Click to expand...

Well, well… Hadn't seen that, thanks for posting. I'll try to integrate my ideas into that thread. I'd be interested to know why you think my design is so inelegant and inconsistent with the iPhone OS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom