Apple Will Permit iPhone Background Processes

Over at One App at a Time, a cogent case is made as to why Apple’s iSDK guidelines prohibit background tasks.

However, you can damn well bet that if Global Corporation X says, “Apple, we’d like to deploy 5,000 iPhones to our staff. And load it with a custom app. And oh, by the way, our IT guys say our app must run in the background.”

What? You think Apple will say No?

Let’s not confuse programming guidelines for iPhones that will be in the hands of the general public with iPhones that will no doubt be issued to corporate employees for direct business use.

Explore posts in the same categories: Tech - Apple

18 Comments on “Apple Will Permit iPhone Background Processes”

  1. Robert B. Says:

    Sure, Corporations with separate agreements with Apple can deploy their internal software that operate outside of the public SDK contract. Apple doesn’t want the typical user, outside of these Corporations, to experience substandard performance and battery life due to unlimited background use by applications the purchase through Apple. Support issues will have yo be met internally, or, Apple will charge the corporation for such services. That is my guess.

  2. mikecane Says:

    Yes, but in all the hue and cry about no multitasking, the very idea of corporate deployment with in-house (non-Apple) support for customized apps has been lost.

  3. AdamC Says:

    Great, I may be wrong, what will the users say when they find the battery drained in double quick time. Complain to Apple that their iPhones’ batteries don’t last a day and overstated their claim that the iPhones have days of standby time.

  4. Lefty Says:

    Oh, Mike, this is simply nonsensical. All the posting you point at does is make excuses as to why Apple hasn’t enabled real multitasking for iPhone developers: shoddy power management on the iPhone.

    I’ve got Windows Mobile phones that allow background tasks, and Symbian phones that allow them; ALP phones will also allow this. Somehow, all of ‘em manage to do it and achieve a battery life in excess of four hours.

    And why would a prospective independent iPhone developer care about what kind of special deals big corporate customers might (according to your fantasy, anyway) be able to cut (or not) with Apple?

    Hey, didja notice that AT&T apparently has a sufficient supply of “re-furb” (i.e. “re-turned”) iPhones that it’s selling them below Apple’s price….? Still think they’re selling like hotcakes…?

  5. mikecane Says:

    For those who don’t know, “lefty” works for ACCESS, the company that purchased PalmSource, which owned the original PalmOS. Its ACCESS Linux Platform (ALP) is an alleged iPhone competitor, so lefty has — at the very least — employment-related reasons to dump on the iPhone. Personally, I think he’ll be sending his resume around by the end of this year as ACCESS comes to its senses and realizes ALP has no chance.

  6. Lefty Says:

    Now, come on, Mike, my criticisms aren’t based on my employer: I worked for Apple for ten years, left on completely amicable terms, and still have numerous friends there. If I criticize the iPhone, it’s because I believe that it’s not a terribly good phone, all in all, and a truly terrible platform for developers.

    I note that you haven’t addressed a single one of my criticisms, preferring (no surprise) to go right to ad hominem.

    One more time: if multitasking and background threads are such terrible ideas, why do they seem to work just fine on other phone platforms?

  7. mikecane Says:

    Where’s the ad hominem? All in your mind. I didn’t say one untruthful thing up there.

    Go argue with him:

    http://furbo.org/2008/03/18/more-brain-surgery/

    Oops. That’s his sequel post. This was the first of the two:

    http://furbo.org/2008/03/16/brain-surgeons/

  8. Lefty Says:

    Need I explain everything to you, Mike? The ad hominem is your responding to my comments solely by identifying my employer; that should be obvious. “Ad hominem” doesn’t mean “untruthful”, nor does it mean “calling names” or anything of the sort.

    Allow me to educate you a bit: “ad hominem” means “directed at the man”, i.e. responding to a point of argument by attempting to devalue the person making the argument in some tangential way or other, rather than addressing the argument itself.

    I assume your advising me to go elsewhere is a substitute for simply running away from the discussion, since you really have nowhere to run to…

  9. mikecane Says:

    What, you really, really think I’ll let you post things here without informing people of the bias behind those Comments? Stick it.

  10. Lefty Says:

    Stick it yourself, coward. You’re not “informing people of bias”, Mike: I’m not saying anything that lots of commentators (who don’t work for ACCESS) aren’t saying as well. You’re dodging the issue, that’s all you’re doing, and in an excruciatingly transparent fashion. Try and be a bit less obvious about it next time, your tap-dancing is frankly embarrassing to watch.

    So, I’m still waiting to hear your explanation of how come other phone OS platforms seem to manage to enable multitasking and background processing quite readily. The fact is that you’re simply whitewashing the lousy power management on the iPhone–the very same factor which has kept Apple from bringing out a 3G version, something which is killing iPhone sales in Europe.

    Hey, where’s that “iPod Air”, anyway…? Apple still hasn’t purchased any significant quantity of flash memory parts so far this year, in spite of the manufacturers selling ‘em below cost. Last year, they spent about a billion and a half on flash memory, you know. I expect Apple’s next analysts’ call should be extremely interesting. (Is my reporting this fact somehow evidence of “bias” as well…?)

  11. mikecane Says:

    Go argue with programmers, pal. Or are you afraid you’re really not adequate to that task?

    Hey, smart guy, perhaps the iPod Air will — oh my god! — use a HARD DRIVE like, you know, the iPod Classic? Wow, you’re a brain.

  12. Lefty Says:

    Well, having spent over two decades as a very successful programmer, and having spent another decade as a manager of programmers, and a director of managers of programmers, no, I don’t have the slightest fear of my adequacy in that regard. Bold words coming from a guy who wouldn’t know a “fencepost problem” from a posthole.

    Perhaps the “iPod Air” will use a quartz crystal, or a positronic brain, or an “advanced AI RISC chip” (thanks to Ving Rhames in Mission: Impossible). Maybe it’ll lower your cholesterol, Mike.

    Maybe there simply isn’t any such thing.

    But you miss the point: if the iPhone and iPod Touch were selling like crazy, you’d think they’d have to buy a few parts to make some more of ‘em, wouldn’t you…?

    Gosh, I forgot who I was talking to! You wouldn’t have a clear idea one way or another, would you? You were the one who was claiming that this imaginary Apple tablet device was somehow going to “self-cannibalize” devices which sell at what would have to be a fraction of the cost, and which are aimed at completely different product spaces.

    Keep tap-dancing: as inept as you are, it’s a lot of fun to watch.

  13. mikecane Says:

    You won’t come back when I’m right.

    I hope you enjoy the spotlight I’ve given you and (again) your employer, ACCESS.

  14. Lefty Says:

    Well, you’d have to actually be right first, wouldn’t you?

    Given the probable readership of this blog, Mike, I’d have to say that your “spotlight” is running at about five watts, at best.

  15. mikecane Says:

    >>>your “spotlight” is running at about five watts, at best.

    And yet you continue to come here. And ACCESS wishes it could generate even “five watts” of interest.

  16. Craig Says:

    Ladies, ladies,

    Wow, are you two married? Mike you gotta take Virgil off, that’s just Sad!!!!!!!!

    Lefty, if you’re as intelligent as you say (Director of a manager who manages a string of monkeys and all) then maybe you should rise above the banter and answer Mikes question for him.

    Anywho, I’m trying to get some info on the old iPhone. After a lot of searching I got here to find you two squabbling.

    So how does the iPhone handle Process Management, File Management, Main-Memory Management, I/O Management Etc etc.

    I know nothing about the damn thing, just searching for information on those functions of its [iPhone] operating system.

    Think you could both help us out? Need some quick answers.

    Cheers Ladies, lol

    Craig
    codershome-at-hotmail-dot-com

  17. mikecane Says:

    You won’t get tech help here. Did you look around past this one post? This isn’t Apple’s OS X Help Desk. And that psychopath has been banned from further vomiting his Comments here.

  18. Whatever Says:

    Wow…What a douchebag you are Mike. Stumbled across your site looking for info on running background threads and came across this. It’s old, but my god man..you banned a guy because you didn’t like him baggin’ on the iPhone. He acted like a responsible person, you acted like a complete fucking asshole who sounds about 10 years old.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: