Google Latitude Arrives For the iPhone — As a Web App 195
An anonymous reader writes "After months of waiting, the Google Latitude social maps service finally arrived for the iPhone ... but thanks to an Apple rejection of the natively developed app, it's a web app. Says Google on their blog, 'We worked closely with Apple to bring Latitude to the iPhone in a way Apple thought would be best for iPhone users. After we developed a Latitude application for the iPhone, Apple requested we release Latitude as a web application in order to avoid confusion with Maps on the iPhone.' But it gets worse for iPhone users: 'Unfortunately, since there is no mechanism for applications to run in the background on iPhone (which applies to browser-based web apps as well), we're not able to provide continuous background location updates in the same way that we can for Latitude users on Android, BlackBerry, Symbian and Windows Mobile.' Latitude has been sprouting new features lately and is an interesting take on social networking, but it looks like Apple is determined to ensure its users only get a seriously crippled implementation compared to the Android and WinMo versions. PC World put it less politely than Google did, saying, 'Google's new Latitude Web app for iPhone is so hamstrung that Apple customers may be wishing they had a BlackBerry or Android handset instead.'"
Apple will allow for the app (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple needs to re-think some things (Score:3, Insightful)
Happy iPhone user here.
Although I couldn't give less of a crap about this particular application (it's pretty worthless overall, in my opinion). They do need to open up the API a bit or they are going to be passed by.
Frankly, I think they will. Steve Jobs isn't one to be outdone by competition.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Apple needs to re-think some things (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a real balance out there. The reason for the tight control is to prevent damaging software, which is a good thing. However Apple needs to lay off on apps that compete with the phones defaults. Sure their stuff is good but it doesn't always quite feet the need where a new app could.
I personally think their process should just check to insure the app doesn't kill the phone or slow it down way to much. And that it is age related. But besides that, let the honest companies make software without worry that they will get denied just because of some app approver with a God complex.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a pretty clear case of anticompetitive behavior, and whether it's illegal or not, it's bad for the customer.
Re: (Score:2)
MobileMe: $99/year/customer for Apple. The main selling point for a great many prospective users isn't any of the other junk they don't care about, it's being able to essentially LoJack their phones - something all the more critical as there aren't the usual insurance plans for the expensive piece of hardware that you have to pay $600 to replace.
Latitude: $0/year/customer for Apple. In many ways would provide the same service.
I'd suggest that, whilst you may see the app as pretty worthless, Apple sees it as
Re: (Score:2)
Very insightfully said. If Steve Jobs perceives Apple to be falling behind compared to the competition, then he'll open it up. But no sooner.
(happy iPhone and Mac user here as well)
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position. People who disagree with the Apple position will always see things as they do as well. Neither side will win the other over. And if it did, Apple would just kill the iPhone project completely.
I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view. I remember some faint complaints about the change to OSX but those didn't last long. The "classic" mode also raised a bit of ire and frustration as I recall. But is Apple "simply perfect?" Can Apple do no wrong?
Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position... I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about?
You're committing the no true scotsman fallacy here. You define Apple fans as people who will support anything Apple does and then question if Apple fans will ever complain or disagree. There are plenty of people who like a lot of what Apple does, but still are happy to complain about what Apple does that they don't like. If someone is complaining about Apple here, how do you know if they're an Apple fan on other topics?
Apple has restrictive and problematic policies that make it difficult or impossible for some applications to work properly. This is certainly a problem. At the same time, those same policies are preventing the iPhone experience form being overrun with a million really crappy applications that degrade the normal user's experience and present huge security and performance problems. Those people complaining that Apple is not competitive when you look at a laundry list of features other smartphones have are completely missing the point. That's not why Apple products become successful. Apple is good at creating a good user experience for normal people and providing only the subset of features they can do well and which contribute to making the overall experience better. Apple wants long battery life, apps sandboxed from one another for security, and apps quality and security checked through a single pipeline. So far a lot of normal users really like that. When they can do other things well enough they'll add those, but they aren't going to rush to add new things just because other phones have them, if Apple doesn't think it will be an overall benefit. If you don't like that, you're probably not their target market.
P.S. I don't have an iPhone and am not really their target market either. I can just appreciate the value of what they do for normal users.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My impression was that the appstore is already a morass of crap anyway (the crap in the store might not present resource or security problems, but that doesn't mean it is useful).
I agree with your assessment that Apple tries to sell a good experience, but from what I can tell, the Appstore suffers from the same plight as pretty much every freeware review site, inclusiveness is favored over editorial opinion (they sort of have to do this is they are going to sell the phones in a state that is locked to their
Re: (Score:2)
Another Apple user here (Macbook this time); I agree with your post and newsletter etc: I'm overall happy with my Mac, but I think Apple is doing certain things that invoke the wrath of us geeks because they are /too/ dumbed down (and cannot be smartened up). Something we used to acuse Microsoft of as well, ironically enough. Another 'feature' is the binary lock-in (which resonates with the subject at hand here); I always hold my breath when doing a software update. Not only do they require reboots too o
Re: (Score:2)
It's true, this is a known fallacy. A true Scotsman would have figured this out.
Re: (Score:2)
Very well thought out reply to an OP who seems to have brain switched off.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Apple fan since '91 here, and yea, I have some complaints.
No MMS on the iPhone. Video I don't give a rip about, but the lack of MMS is annoying.
The USB keyboards have always been too damned small.
The USB mice have always sucked from Apple, the ADB mice rocked though.
Moving power to the side of the MacBooks/Powerbooks also sucked.
Documentation has lacked for a decade or so too.
Re: (Score:2)
Do the USB mice really suck? I thought the mighty mouse with the scroll bar is pretty nice (though the be fair I don't use one on a daily basis). Of course anything is an improvement after the hockey puck...
Re: (Score:2)
MMS isn't implemented on 1st gen iphone even the hardware is fully capable for such a simple feature. So this is a nice fuck you from apple to all their first customers of the iphone brand.
Re: (Score:2)
Upgrade the firmware? I prefer a phone where MMS Just Works, Out Of The Box.
Well, I suppose you can just throw your old phone in the trash and purchase a brand new one every few months instead of just downloading the free updates over the internet. The new phone will be loaded with the newest firmware out of the box already after all.
I am curious, you never apply patches or updates to your current phone?
Using that logic, if you can't apply SP1 to Windows Vista, then it is safe to say, even now after multiple service packs, that Vista should only be judged on how it worked on first
Re: (Score:2)
Oh I'm sorry, someone with mod points has spoken - I'm obviously mistaken at all the defence people gave for the Iphone lacking MMS.
And heaven forbid someone mentions another phone - a Motorola V980, btw - in the comments. (What is up with the mod system lately? I can't remember the last time I had points, yet they're given out to people who misuse negative mods for "I disagree with this person"?) I'm not trolling, I'm arguing my point of view. Just because you disagree doesn't make it a Troll.
Re: (Score:2)
Once.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the off chance that you're asking an honest question, I'll give you an honest answer. I am an Apple fan, I own an iPod Touch, a Macbook, a G5 iMac, and a G4 iBook. I guess I qualify. Thinks I don't like about Apple products? iTunes, for one. Since iPhoto got upgraded in Leopard, iTunes is the shittiest piece of software that Apple has let out of Cupertino. I hate it. The only reason I haven't switched away from it is that I haven't found anything better for the Mac to manage a music collection. I also
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position. The Apple haters will always blindly attack the Apple position.
There, FTFY. You had a minor consistency error.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't hate Apple computers or the OS. Professionally, I support Mac OS 9, Mac OS X and a wide variety of apps that run on them... along with Windows clients and servers, apps... and Linux. I have no use for an iPod or an iPhone, however. I just get tired of the discussion and would like to hear some middle-ground once in a while. Fortunately, I did get a couple of responders who are more centerist and that was more or less what I was after. But I have to say that since I am on the geek side and like
Re: (Score:2)
Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position
Do you really see a lot of people who are "blindly support[ing]" Apple here? I've read through a lot of the comments and I don't see much (if any at all) of that...
Agreed that this is a geek-emotion battle and neither side is ever going to convince the other with arguments.
I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view.
I'm going to put the onus on you -- where are these Apple fans who claim that apple can do no wrong and is perfect in every way?
Re: (Score:2)
I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view. I remember some faint complaints about the change to OSX but those didn't last long. The "classic" mode also raised a bit of ire and frustration as I recall. But is Apple "simply perfect?" Can Apple do no wrong?
Well played troll sir! Well played!
Lets play fetch first, then I'll give you a treat!
I am an apple fan. This choice, and those like it relating to rejecting apps from the store for very stupid reasons does indeed piss me off.
So your entire argument is now moot, as 'all' apple fans do not follow your description.
(Remember, it only takes 1 person out of all of them to make the filter 'all' answer as false)
While this is not why I jail broke my phone, it is one more advantage to doing so.
My guess is that appl
Re: (Score:2)
The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position.
I am an Apple fan. I think Apple have made a great product in the iPhone and Macbook, but certainly they could make them better. As an iphone developer, there are parts that annoy me, some of them I understand why they do it (the approval process), some of the baffle me (UIWebview ratings, modifying the camera view).
I don't use this feature, I understand why Apple wouldn't allow it, but think they are wrong. But heh, they run this huge c
Re: (Score:2)
You just blew my mind, man.
Re:Is there a way to filter out anything "iPhone"? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't like the Iphone's lack of copy/paste/Java/MMS/etc - can jailbreaking fix this?
Of course not. Some phones have flaws or missing features. The Iphone has plenty. Jailbreaking won't fix any of this. Jailbreaking is something that you have to do in addition, to get functionality that on other phones Just Works.
Jesus, what is it with the Apple haters?
Ah yes - anyone who doesn't worship the Iphone, or criticises Apple, must be a "hater". You can't comprehend that people might have some rational reasons fo
Re: (Score:2)
I don't like the Iphone's lack of copy/paste/Java/MMS/etc - can jailbreaking fix this?
Of course not. Some phones have flaws or missing features. The Iphone has plenty. Jailbreaking won't fix any of this. Jailbreaking is something that you have to do in addition, to get functionality that on other phones Just Works.
I am not defending apple not including such basic features 'out of the box' like they should have... But there are some factual inaccuracies in your post I thought I would kindly point out.
Jailbreaking (Pre os 3.0 at least) will fix the lack of copy/paste. There are a couple tools one can use for that, one standalone, and others built into various replacement management apps like bossprefs or sbsettings apps.
Needless to say, in 3.0 there is copy/paste built in like it should have been from the start, so
Latitude web app better than most "native" ones (Score:3, Interesting)
Flamebate-tastic (Score:2, Insightful)
but it looks like Apple is determined to ensure its users only get a seriously crippled implementation compared to the Android and WinMo versions.
I think a more accurate replacement for this line would be, "but it looks like Apple is unwilling to make exceptions to their developer agreement for Google. Unfortunately, this means a crippled implementation compared to the Android and WinMo versions."
This summary makes it seem as though Apple conciously went out of their way to cripple the app, instead simply being inflexible in it's design restrictions. Everyone and their cat has an opinion on Apples "1 app at a time" policy, and that's fine. Bash
Re: (Score:2)
"This summary makes it seem as though Apple conciously went out of their way to cripple the app,"
Actually, they did. Didn't you read the part of the summary where Apple insisted that it not be a native app and had to be a web-app instead? They -are- going out of their way to cripple it.
Re: (Score:2)
The told Google that their app would not be approvable for inclusion in the App Store because it requires the ability to run in the background. They suggested that the best way to get the app on the iPhone would be to load it as a web app for this reason.
Google could have decided to modify the app so that it was approvable, but decided against that. Since Apple didn't write they app, they can't "intentionally cripple" it, they can only veto the apps inclusion in the app store if t
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand how the biggest, douchiest "open source" advocates who whine about DRM to no end are such huge Apple fans when the iPhone is the most CLOSED mobile system on the planet. It's just dumbfounding. I can't write my OWN FUCKING apps that run on the iPhone. It's astonishing to me, really.
Google and web apps (Score:5, Insightful)
This must be a tiny bit embarrassing for Google. They're staking their reputation on Chrome OS, an OS based on the principle that native apps have had their day, and that everything we want to do can be done perfectly well through web apps.
Yet everyone's describing Google's web app as "crippled" on the iPhone, solely because Apple wouldn't allow them to release the native version of it. Why did they even deem it necessary to write a native version in the first place?
Incidentally, is there something in the Slashdot terms and conditions which means the site has to get worse every day? I can't even interact with the comment box with my mouse any more, it just ignores all clicks as if there's another HTML element overlaying it. This is truly pathetic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you even RTFA?
Yes.
It's one thing for web apps to be fully functional on a desktop or a notebook, it's quite another on a handset.
No it isn't, it's precisely the same thing.
it's crippled because it can't run in the background, due to the iPhone's shitty implementation of multi-tasking, whereas as a native app they were hoping it could
Why would they be hoping that? I think they'd be aware of the fact that neither web apps nor native apps can run on the background on an iPhone.
Re: (Score:2)
You're clueless. Google's vision is a standardized "browser" running web apps. It's not some shitty mobile browser developed by Apple that will only run one thing at a time, not in the background.
Your original post, to which GP replied, was some wierd accusation of how CRAZY it was that google complained they couldn't write a native app but had to write a webapp. What's stupid about your original post is that Google must do this because Apples web app execution environment is limited and sucky.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong.On a convergence device like the iPhone where you are forced to buy an unlimited data service, you are practically guaranteed to have connectivity to the cloud. That is not so on a standalone desktop or notebook. iPhone is down? Just drive a mile or two away and get perfect high-speed connection. Your cable or DSL is down? Make an appointment with your ISP and wait days to weeks for a resolution.
What's up with Apple lately? (Score:4, Insightful)
Breaking iTunes compatibility on Linux and Blackberry and now they're crippling a Google app. What up? I'm sure there's a strategy here, I just can't see it.
I don't think trying to Balkanize their services and regulate iPhone users is going to ultimately be good for them or their user base. The iPhone user demographic may not have the same brand loyalty as the Apple faithful.
Beyond that I've always been impressed with Apple's execution...until recently. Instead of their usual suave and polish, always being ahead of the curve in packaging and style, lately they seem to be heavy handed and bumbling around a bit. Reactive instead of their usual proactive. Being reactive and heavy handed reminds me of Microsoft and even though I'm not a Mac fan myself I really appreciate what Apple did well.
I hope they right themselves and implement a service strategy with the same quality they've shown in other areas. If they start trying to make iPhones the AOL of cellular services, then Google and other providers are going to out-maneuver them with superior service offerings on a wider range of devices.
Maybe it's some flashback to the OS wars. Instead of a big market share and being the dominant player in the field, Apple is setting themselves up for a smaller but more loyal market share. Which could be either good or bad depending on how you feel about them tying their OS to their hardware.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple has always been like this. It's Steve Jobs' style.
Sometimes it's maddening. But my overall experience with Apple products is still overwhelmingly positive, which is why I keep buying and using them.
Apple doesn't care for "marketshare" as such -- they care about profits. So as long as they get the biggest profits, it doesn't matter what kind of marketshare they have. Indeed, they might have only a small marketshare, which is perfectly fine. That's why Apple refuses to compete at the lower end of the ma
background (Score:4, Funny)
The iphone's OS has no mechanism for running applications in the background??? That's stunning! Is it based on Windows 3.1 or something?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the OS itself fully supports it.
Apple will not allow 3rd parties to write apps that can run in the background.
This is mostly due to battery life, and memory issues. Do some research on the typical issues people run into with background apps on other platforms and it starts to make a lot of sense. However, in this instance I think Apple is off their rocker. They should create an API to handle on-going location recording and posting.
Speaking as a bit of an Apple fanboy (Score:2)
HEY APPLE.
Worried about us users confusing Latitude with Maps? We're not that stupid.
Latitude is MUCH nicer. Thanks for putting us users first.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
No iphone? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No iphone? (Score:4, Insightful)
...Latitude is the 'service' where Google gets to track pretty much every move you make, right? I'm still at a loss why people are so enthusiastic over this.
AT&T is likely crippling the iPhone (Score:5, Interesting)
AT&T wants to sell their 'AT&T FamilyMap' plan to its users. Subscribers are charged $9.99 for the ability to locate up to 2 other people with AT&T phones $14.99 to locate up to 5 people. Google latitude will do this for free only better because users can locate as many people as they want and it can locate non-AT&T users.
I think that Apple would be happy to allow this but the problem is that wireless providers abuse their oligopoly status to cripple cell phone features so that users are forced to give the wireless carriers money for things that they otherwise would have been free and better.
For example Verizon forces smart phone manufacturers to rip out WiFi so users are forced to pay Verizon to access the internet. MP3 players are ripped out of cellphones and replaced by silly paid services such as VCast.
Banning Latitude is almost certainly just another mundane example of carrier oligopoly abuse. The federal government needs to legislate to stop cell phone carriers from crippling phones.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Banning Latitude is almost certainly just another mundane example of carrier oligopoly abuse. The federal government needs to legislate to stop cell phone carriers from crippling phones.
Wrong solution!
The federal government needs break up the oligopoly to allow real competition to thrive. In a competitive market, we can have the features we want without the government having to decide what features those should be, which always causes problems. Verizon can strip wifi out of your phone because they know you're not going to switch to another carrier that supports phones with wifi. There are plenty of reasons why it wouldn't be easy for you to switch - and THAT'S the root of the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
With Verizon buying up Alltel, and thrid tier carriers such as RCC, it begins to be a hard time to switch. We are now limited to 4 nationwide carriers- AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon. Depending on where you live, you might have the option of a second tier like Metro-PCS or US Cellular, or a third tier like CellularONE. But if you don't use the big guys, expect some pretty hefty roaming fees as soon as you are not in the home market.
Re: (Score:2)
This is one of the reasons I jumped ship from Verizon. I got tired of having to go *through* the VCast music store (clicking something along the lines of "Buy Music") to play my music (every single frikkin time).
Also the fact that to use my own mp3 as a ringtone you had to:
1. Record a Voice Message clip directly to the SD card
2. Remove the SD Card form the phone
3. Plug SD Card to your PC
4. Copy mp3 onto the SD Card
5. Re-name mp3 to the same name as the Voice Clip
6. Put SD Card back into phone
7. Select the
Re: (Score:2)
I love it; anything remotely wrong with the iPhone is AT&T's fault. Anything remotely wrong with the iTunes system is the RIAA or the MPAA's fault. It's a great defense. Apple does everything in the users' interests.
Obviously you're a snarky troll, but you make an interesting point (even if you didn't mean to). You see Apple does what is in Apple's best interests, but in the case of iTunes Apple's best interests are to do whatever it takes to make iPods easy for people to use so they'll buy more. This makes them one of the strongest and most effective consumer advocates fighting against their partners in the RIAA and MPAA. Apple is largely responsible for the removal of DRM from online music stores because it is what b
Who cares? These types of apps should concern ppl (Score:2)
I am not someone who normally posts this sort of anti-google message as I actually LOVE google's applications, functionality, and the real threat they pose to Micro$oft! But even I am starting to get concerned about how willing people are to give away all privacy for a few "colored beads."
I love all the Google apps, but this is getting rediculous. Now they will have my email, cell phone number, and ability to track my movement. Data mine both to compare my email use and apps use against my movements. Be ab
Monopoly? (Score:5, Insightful)
How does Apple get away with that as an excuse when Microsoft gets sued billions of dollars for simply including a web browser or media player with Windows? At least in Windows you can install a different browser!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
iPhone to Blackberry Conversion Report (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Nah, fanbois will be on to tell you why worse is better soon.
Re:First (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
6/10. Lost me at "shound't".
Re:First (Score:5, Funny)
Apple know what's best for it's customers. They shound't, and they won't allow the likes of Google to undermine their customers' experience with the iPhone using shoddy, poorly designed applications.
You, sir, are the biggest idiot I have ever met online.
Satire [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Have you met yourself yet? Also, WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoops, there's one now.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Don't click !!! GNAA Troll !!!!
Re:Look into the crystal ball (Score:5, Insightful)
And this relates to Apple limiting their own customers from being able to do things that the other 'big' phones can do how? Sounds like the one a step behind is Apple. This IS about features that are being rolled out for other phones that Apple refuses to allow on the iPhone, the only one playing catchup is Apple here and from the article it's less catchup and more sit on your ass and take a nap.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Look into the crystal ball (Score:4, Insightful)
How do Windows Mobile and Android manage running background apps perfectly fine? Does Apple have some inferiour programmers who cannot implement a proper scheduler?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The iPhone is just a Darwin machine, which all of us here should know is based on FreeBSD. It, therefore, has a very good scheduler (one of FreeBSD's best features is that the system stays usable and responsive, seemingly no matter how high the load on the CPU is).
Apple's own software multitasks just fine, where it is useful to do so. They just don't let third-party apps run in the background.
My jailbroke iPod Touch (same hardware, more or less) works just fine as a multiuser Unix box, background apps and
Re: (Score:2)
So if the scheduler works fine, why everyone assumes that the battery life would be about three hours if Apple would allow multitasking for third party apps?
Re: (Score:2)
So if the scheduler works fine, why everyone assumes that the battery life would be about three hours if Apple would allow multitasking for third party apps?
Because if you Jailbreak your iPhone, you can run background apps. There is real world data to base this on.
If you choose your backgrounded app carefully, it won't totally kill your battery. But if you run several, and they do not play nice, and if they keep the radios on all the time your battery will not last long. (Although 3 hours seems a bit short to me).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Then the scheduler on the iPhone is does suck because I extensively use multitasking on my Windows Mobile device (HTC Touch HD) and the battery life is descent.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The iPhone is just a Darwin machine, which all of us here should know is based on FreeBSD. It, therefore, has a very good scheduler.
The iPhone is a Darwin machine, which all of us here should know is not based on FreeBSD, but Mach with a bunch of modifications and a BSD runtime layer on top. In fact, MacOS X has a pretty poor scheduler, as Anand et al have benchmarked and anybody's personal experience should corroborate.
Which has little to do with Apple's decision to forbid third-party background processes.
Re: (Score:2)
The antenna used to listen for incoming calls or texts takes just a tiny bit of current. Running an active TCP session for an IM client constantly would light up much more of the iPhone's hardware, and drain the battery that much faster.
Personally, I'd pay $100 more for an iPhone if somebody made it twice as thick and used all the extra space for a bigger fucking battery. If I even use the thing, the battery lasts about half of a day.
Re:Look into the crystal ball (Score:5, Informative)
Running an active TCP session for an IM client constantly would light up much more of the iPhone's hardware, and drain the battery that much faster.
Well, not exactly....
An active TCP session is EXACTLY what Apple's Push Notification Service [apple.com] uses.
Its an extended version of ActivSync [microsoft.com], Licensed from Microsoft.
It works like this:
You open a TCP connection with an Apple Notification server, and shutdown the radio, leaving the connection open, by never explicitly closing it. With the radio down, the phone is Saving power.
Periodically, you wake up the radio, check if the TCP socket is readable. If so, you read it, and notify the user, and optionally launch that application that the notification was destined for.
If the socket failed, (timed out, network dropped, etc) you reestablish the socket.
Since TCP timeout is usually on the order of 12 minutes or longer, this happens only about 5 times an hour.
Checking socket readability takes just a tiny bit of power for a very very short time. So your radio is on for a few seconds every hour. (Which it is anyway, listening for incoming calls).
Apple's push notification leverages this single socket connection to an unlimited number of applications in the iPhone, by having a single daemon watching the socket, signaling the target app, and notifying the user.
It operates similar to InetD [about.com] in Linux, other than instead of waiting for new connections, it is watching existing ones. In fact, there is some discussion as to whether ActiveSync is even patentable because it is so obvious.
And to be perfectly pedantic, Antennas do not consume any power when receiving.
Re: (Score:2)
I have been educated. I suppose I can safely assume that it's only the walled-garden aspect to the iPhone that prevents every otherwise-background app from using that particular framework.
Also, to answer your pedantry with more of the same: The antenna doesn't consume power, but the processor to interpret the data received by the antenna does, so nyeah.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, neat.
A "battery extender" that, in addition to being non-integral, gets its power stuffed through at least a couple of DC-DC converters within the phone itself, all while the internal battery charger leeches current and generates heat (ie: wastes even more energy).
Just what I want on a mobile device -- more complexity!
Thanks for the tip!
(Before the mods mark this down as "troll," please understand the following: I like the iPhone. I also like my iPod Touch. And if I didn't get a free Verizon phone f
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who thinks Apple is going to sit on their laurels while Android eats its lunch simply doesn't know Steve Jobs. First, compare the quality of user experience between the iPhone and all of its rivals. The iPhone is so far ahead of anything currently on the market that Apple has the luxury of rejecting apps that would otherwise be useful for their customers.
This is certainly open to debate. The iPhone is a fantastic consumer device and I think is in a leadership position in that segment. However, as a business tool it doesn't hold up well compared to some of the more mature offerings available. Apple understands the consumer customer and marketplace very well but the enterprise market has them stumped (fanbois will say "uninterested"). I don't think Android is there yet, either, but I think I'm starting to understand what they're going towards and the next few
Re: (Score:2)
Really?
How many generations did it take for Apple to concede that Copy&Paste is a necessity on a PDA? THREE genertions of the iPhone?
They also don't value openness, hence jailbreak opening up the phone to give a TON more functionality, including bash, ssh, and so forth.
How long did it take Apple to admit that turn-by-turn GPS is a necessity? It has existed from day one on Windows Mobile, but did Apple allow turn-by-turn GPS? Oh no
Whoa, what is this! (Score:2)
The competition will, as always, be one step behind.
Is this irony? Whatever it is, it's thick enough to cut with a knife!
The iPhone now has to catch up to what the competition is doing - in terms of real usefulness (copy and paste, system-wide search, multitasking, you know all those trivial things), the iPhone's OS is still catching up to what Palm OS, Symbian, and even Windows Mobile were doing years ago. I LOL when I see those things being advertised as innovative new features. Apple's responsible for many innovations, but the only thing they innovated
Re: (Score:2)
I entirely agree. And nevermind smartphones - even bog standard cheap phones had for years what Apple took ages to get (3G, copy/paste, Java, MMS, video recording). I don't even consider these features anymore - even five years ago they were basic standard items. If I bought a phone that didn't have them, I'd consider it a defect and take it back.
The Iphone may be at a smartphone price level, but it's not deserving of the "smartphone" name in terms of features. And look at sales figures - it's a minority ni
Re: (Score:2)
The iPhone is so far ahead of anything currently on the market
Yet here we are, with yet another article about something that's already been on other phones for ages (at least for once this is mentioned in TFS).
So I'll bite - give me several features that the Iphone has, that no other phone has?
And please, none of this subjective vague "It does it better it just does". Especially considering that having to jailbreak your phone to get it running the apps that Apple haven't approved hardly constitutes "just wo
Re: (Score:2)
As an iphone user of about a year, this is exactly why it is an awesome device. If you haven't used one for any real amount of time, its not surprising that you just don't "get it".
Does it have faults? Yes. but what it does, it does extremely well. I jailbroke my iphone to see wha
Re: (Score:2)
> We can expect to find better copy/paste support.
The fact you quote something that has been a rudimentary feature of every computing experience since about 1989 as an exciting up and coming feature of the iPhone is hilarious.
Re: (Score:2)
First swing with the cluebat.
Google and Apple share three board members. This is the biggest reason that has kept multitouch (for all its uselessness) out of the main Android builds. Of course it was hacked in about two weeks after the release of Android 1.0 and is included in every major community ROM (JesusFreke, Cyanogen and so on).
Second swing with the cluebat.
Android and Iphone aren't competing. Android is n
Re: (Score:2)
Google and Apple share three board members. This is the biggest reason that has kept multitouch (for all its uselessness) out of the main Android builds.
Ahh, thank you - I wasn't aware of that! I was always under the impression that Google didn't want to get into a patent war over it (which didn't make much sense to me, in light of Bliski.) Your explanation certainly makes more sense to me. :)
Apple has captured the audience which does not use smartphones. These are the people who have traditionally used the latest Motorola RAZR, LG Shine or Samsung Omnia, phones
.. and post on /. talking about how much farther ahead Apple is over Android. :)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a reasons there is a lot of latitude given to Google by Apple, why else is Gmail the only third party mail client permitted on the iphone. No Y (Yahoo) or MS Live (MS and Apple aren't competing either despite what the fanboys on both sides think).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why wait for Apple? (Score:5, Funny)
Yup. Can't see any legal ramifications there.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You are absolutely correct. There are absolutely no legal ramifications there. Feels great to live in a FREE country :)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
or, Google could release the source code to the app. This would give a great example for other developers to create other apps for Latitude: open social networks always work well (see Twitter). It would also prevent any legal issues with Apple, as there are many open-source apps out there right now, and Google has a good history with open source. If someone wants it, they can compile it themselves or (more likely) get it from someone else who has already compiled it.
As an added bonus, a non-jailed applicati
Re: (Score:2)
The battery of my WM phone generally lasts for three days. With full multitasking, a larger and higher resolution display than iPhone and lots of eBook reading on the device. And the best thing is, my device is only slightly larger due to the huge screen.
There are also other benefits of multitasking like using ICQ while listening to music while reading a book.
Re: (Score:2)
You're right. Given that the Iphone is crippled even compared with bog standard cheap phones, it's not like yet another flaw is going to make them change their mind. The RDF is just too strong...
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had a blackberry or Android, then I could sell them on ebay and buy more great apps for my iphone. I think that was the posters point?
Re: (Score:2)
No. Google left out multi-touch support because the first generation hardware didn't support it.
Bullshit. With the right software, the G1 does multitouch just fine, thankyouverymuch.
Yes, there were hacks, but they were total crap.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. The "hacks" just enable it in software - there needs to be support in the kernel, and in the apps. You have that, the G1 (and Magic) both do multitouch just fine.
The HTC Hero is the first Android device with actual hardware (and software) multi-touch support.
This is the most bizarre statement you've made. If the Hero is the first with hardware support, why is it that you take the Hero ROM, load it on your G1, and you get multitouch? You have made two contradictory claims (of course, they're
Re: (Score:2)