Live data from Hacker News

iOS7 is not about flat

medium.com

111–120 of 135 posts

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discussion was around architecture. Of course it may not behave as intended when actually implemented because of bugs. Or because of Apple outright lying in their communications. Sure, those are possibilities, but they're irrelevant to architectural criticism.

But you have no real architecture details, only a small number of bullet points on how it's supposed to behave and a simple but not horribly descriptive API. That isn't an architecture, that's just marketing materials. They are completely irrelevant to anything. Given only that, you cannot possibly make informed commentary on how it will behave in practice, you are just parroting a story. In particular, you said "it…

  > But you have no real architecture details, only a small
  > number of bullet points on how it's supposed to behave
  > and a simple but not horribly descriptive API.
And WWDC presentation.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#112
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feature X is neither the worst thing in the world it's ridiculous that Android did it! Nor is it an unallowed good, it's completely ridiculous that iOS didn't immediately o it! (as whatever the opposite of apple fanboys would have said; hateboys?) Rather, it's a feature with some negative repurcussions as well as benefits, some possible tradeoffs. Apple, for better or for worse, these days, esp on iOS, generally choo…

My comments are not actually about Apple, but of the pro-Apple blogger commenter types and their side commentary.

Your comment actually is a good example of anti-Apple comment type, and that's it.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discussion was around architecture. Of course it may not behave as intended when actually implemented because of bugs. Or because of Apple outright lying in their communications. Sure, those are possibilities, but they're irrelevant to architectural criticism.

But you have no real architecture details, only a small number of bullet points on how it's supposed to behave and a simple but not horribly descriptive API. That isn't an architecture, that's just marketing materials. They are completely irrelevant to anything. Given only that, you cannot possibly make informed commentary on how it will behave in practice, you are just parroting a story. In particular, you said "it…

I'm not sure why you think I have no real architectural details. What do you know about what I know?

Regardless, I think your pedantry is based on a statement I intended to be read in a less formal fashion than you're choosing to read it. When I said that it was not a possibility for poorly-behaved apps to drain significant amounts of battery under iOS 7, I didn't mean that it was absolutely impossible under any and all circumstances including system bugs, unforeseen architectural weaknesses, or gamma ray induced bitflips. People say "Linux uses memory protection to keep processes from corrupting the memory of other processes" and we all understand that they don't mean that it's literally impossible for memory problems to ever happen.

Likewise, my point was that it is generally true that iOS 7 doesn't allow apps to wake up as often as they want. That is a design goal behind its architecture. Doubtlessly, neither its architecture nor its implementation are perfect — I'd be surprised if it were utterly impossible for an app to end up running whenever it wants in the background. But it'd be boorish to belabor that point.

The original post that has led to this discussion was saying that Android has been criticized for being designed to allow apps to run in the background arbitrarily and now iOS has been redesigned to allow that too. That's not true. And the conclusion of hypocriticalness that was drawn from this faulty premise was untrue.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't call anyone a fanboy, I was quoting epo during the only time I mentioned that word. What I brought up was the reality distortion field. What you're describing is Apple doing the same thing as Android but with the only difference being developers have to use the equivalent of SyncAdapter. That's not wildly different, that's literally been baked into Android since long before Apple decided to adopt that model…

Well, saying people are under a reality distortion field is de facto calling someone a fanboy, in my opinion. Personally, I agree with some of what you're saying, but it kind of sounds like you've taken a straw man and run with it. "Apple's audience pretending these features never existed before or that they were bad ideas then but great ideas now." First off, that's a wild generalization. Who is saying that? Sounds…

I should have known better than to get drawn into this discussion. You're right that no one in this thread specifically stated that these are brand new ideas, but you can't argue that people are stating that it was bad in Android but good in iOS. It all comes back to the user choice vs walled garden argument. There's the Android way of doing it, and the Apple way of doing it. You say it's a significant difference; the difference is simply in Apple not letting people do something they could do in Android. The parts that overlap are almost exactly the same. Think of how many people believe that the iPod was the first MP3 player, the iPhone was the first smartphone, and the iPad was the first tablet. Do you think that's by mistake, or because Apple really wants people to think that? How often on HN do I hear people making the claim that Apple beat Microsoft to the tablet and smartphone game? [1]

"On Android can't the app just run forever and decide on its own how often to poll the servers? This is a different thing. The OS decides when to schedule things if the app supports it. What may have been true years ago isn't necessarily an issue anymore."

vs

"When a competitor does it and Apple says they won't, it's the worst thing in the world. Once the competitor proves its worth and Apple does it, it's now the best thing ever"

Sure I'm using hyperbole, but I think I adequately summed up the argument. xutopia implied that Android's battery life suffered from having background jobs running, and that this was a bad thing. Since Apple is only letting the jobs run at predefined intervals and all at the same time to save battery life, this is a good thing. That is exactly "it was bad when Android was doing it, and it's good when iOS is doing it". I accept that perhaps he didn't know how Android's background scheduler works, but that still says to me "background tasks are a bad thing except when Apple does it."

You're also conveniently ignoring that I called out just about everyone who had responded at that point, not just xutopia. xutopia's comment was the least offensive of all of them, and I certainly understand his argument. Apple is doing it in one of the many correct ways. It's not, however, significantly different from how Android recommends developers accomplish the same task. The only difference is, on Android this is discretionary and on iOS this is enforced. Neither of these are bad things.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6264617

This is a discussion I participated in not that long ago where people were legitimately stating that Windows Mobile and Windows tablets don't count because the iPhone and Android phones look different and have faster processors. I just gave up.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#115
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The two standard product classifications is "7 inch tablet" and "10 inch tablet". Those are standardized names, even though there is really no 10" tablet and really no 7" tablet. The iPad is grouped in with 10" tablet even though the screen size is slightly less than 10". Similar to how the iPhone 5 has a 4" screen, but it's much smaller than a normal 4" screen in width. That's the product category. "7 inch tablet" a…

I sound ridiculous because people miscategorized the iPad mini into the same category as the Nexus 7? Have you used both? Two very different experiences. So I'm saying the two categories are insufficient. The iPad mini is a compact iPad. It's a third category. 7" tablets are more like large smartphones.

I would say that the iPad is not a tablet because it doesn't have a x86 processor nor does it run Windows Tablet Edition. The iPad is a larger smartphone, and the iPad Mini is a smaller larger cell phone.

I hope I don't sound ridiculous because someone miscategorized the iPad in the same category as Windows XP Tablet Edition.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#116
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comments are not actually about Apple, but of the pro-Apple blogger commenter types and their side commentary.

Your comment actually is a good example of anti-Apple comment type, and that's it.

I actually quite like Apple products, specifically Macbook Pros and iPads, so that's just miscommunication.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#117
post #73
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forget a few things. On Android can't the app just run forever and decide on its own how often to poll the servers? This is a different thing. The OS decides when to schedule things if the app supports it. Also battery life has improved a great deal since the first Android or iPhone device came out. What may have been true years ago isn't necessarily an issue anymore.

You mean like using Android's SyncAdapter and setting inInexactRepeating()? Android has supported this basic type of background scheduling since the start of time. The main difference is that Android you can do more - which can be abused. And their solution for abuse is a battery monitor that allows you to see which app is using the most battery. In a way you can say Android is more superior/powerful or you can say t…

Unfortunately, I think many Android app developers either don't know or care about "API abuse". When my Android phone is sitting "idle" with the display off, adb logcat still shows tons of debug logging from apps doing more work than they should. I like the freedom that Android gives developers, but, as you suggest, I think iOS provides a better user experience.

I can think of many ways Google could fix some of this bad behavior by throttling apps running in the background.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you have no real architecture details, only a small number of bullet points on how it's supposed to behave and a simple but not horribly descriptive API. That isn't an architecture, that's just marketing materials. They are completely irrelevant to anything. Given only that, you cannot possibly make informed commentary on how it will behave in practice, you are just parroting a story. In particular, you said "it…

I'm not sure why you think I have no real architectural details. What do you know about what I know? Regardless, I think your pedantry is based on a statement I intended to be read in a less formal fashion than you're choosing to read it. When I said that it was not a possibility for poorly-behaved apps to drain significant amounts of battery under iOS 7, I didn't mean that it was absolutely impossible under any and…

"I'm not sure why you think I have no real architectural details. What do you know about what I know? "

They do not appear as supporting details of your argument, so ...

Again, you are trying to make it seem like pedantry and that i am addressing only extreme cases or bugs , and my point is you have offered no details to support any part of your argument.

"Likewise, my point was that it is generally true that iOS 7 doesn't allow apps to wake up as often as they want. "

I quoted your statement about battery life, and said you have offered no details to show this to be the case. Rather than offer details to refute that, you have now instead said "I said something different".

I'd appreciate it if you would stick on point and address my contention that you have not offered details about this statement:"it let poorly-behaved apps drain significant amounts of battery in the background and it's not true that Apple has now added that possibility."

Please offer details to back this up. IE what architectural details you know that you believe make it the case that apple has not added the possibility of apps using large amounts of battery in the background.

If the details are "apps can't arbitrarily wake themselves up", then your statement about the possibility of background apps draining battery life is easily shown to be wrong, and i'll be happy to refute it for you. If it is something else, i'd love to hear it, so i know exactly what argument i am addressing.

Let's stay with this one part of the argument, please.

Re: iOS7 is not about flat

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you have no real architecture details, only a small number of bullet points on how it's supposed to behave and a simple but not horribly descriptive API. That isn't an architecture, that's just marketing materials. They are completely irrelevant to anything. Given only that, you cannot possibly make informed commentary on how it will behave in practice, you are just parroting a story. In particular, you said "it…

I'm not sure why you think I have no real architectural details. What do you know about what I know? Regardless, I think your pedantry is based on a statement I intended to be read in a less formal fashion than you're choosing to read it. When I said that it was not a possibility for poorly-behaved apps to drain significant amounts of battery under iOS 7, I didn't mean that it was absolutely impossible under any and…

Don't worry about the trolls, your points made sense to me.

The crazies have come out in this thread.

Post reply on HN