Sprint Announces Palm Pre Service Plans

Multitasking 4 webapps? No multitasking of compiled apps. because there is no "proper" SDK.

>Why PIC doesn't also mention that shows how everyone in the Palm
>community is enchanted with the Pre, including until the "4 app
>multitasking" revelation.

What I find humorous is how certain individuals chided Apple for their *initial* locked down approach, yet until webOS is released, "road tested", debugged, and stabilized, we won't see these limitations lifted.

Palm may be good, but even they can't produce 100% bug-free code.

>Let's see, 4 apps multitasking. That's 1) email, 2) IM, 3) web, 4) music, >5) fail.

You'll also need the phone app running in the background, otherwise how would you ever get a call? Unless of course this "4 multitasking apps" limit excludes the phone app.

>Hardly leaves room for any real multitasking really.

Sounds like typical Palm marketing - promise the sky and deliver a beta product.

I think how many app cards one would want to run at once is going to depend on what the apps are. I can't see a lot of reason to run more than 4 apps at once, but it depends on how things are set up. However, the notion that you're not going to be able to have the Web, email, and IM running at the same time as you're playing music is silly. In fact, if memory serves, they demonstrated these things working together when the phone was demoed at CES.

I may be wrong, but it may depend on how many instances of webkit are actually running. If there's only one for all open cards then there's (almost) no limit on the number of applications. On the hand if each card gets it's own instance of webkit, then the memory (and resources usage in general) will fix the limit. And 4-5 might be a good guess.

I see what you're saying, but I can't imagine why each card would get its own instance of WebKit. The way the app structure works, I don't think there's a need for it. An app can have more than one card, after all. The only way I could see WebKit needing more than one instance is if it couldn't be adapted to the card model (which I kind of doubt).

From what I've gleaned from the comments here, the limitation will come into play if you have more than one card open for Webkit. If there is a 5 card limit, then it doesn't really matter how many instances of Webkit are running. If you have 2 Webkit cards, you have three more slots for open cards (assuming the 5 card limit stands). That means you can have one program using 5 cards, or 5 programs using one card each, or any combination of the two.

My point in the earlier post was that # of cards != # of apps you can have running at once, because there's the opportunity for dashboard apps and background apps using the notification area.

The user interface becomes "unwieldy" when more than 5 cards are manipulatable (accroding to the Palm guy demoing the Pre - YMMV).

There undoubtedly are OTHER type of processes (like the database handler, etc) that "don't count" w.r.t. the "unwieldy" comment.

hkklife wrote:
I honestly think the whole thing is being overblown. I'd rather have rock-solid stability & blinding speed (like POS users had years ago) for running 1-3 apps at a time than have a veritable stack of cards onscreen and flicking through all of them.

Yeah, what he said.

Seriously though, why would you want to keep every little apps running in the background and have to flick through a gazillion cards every time you wanted to open it? Are there that many apps that benefit from the ability to run in the background on a mobile device? Don't get me wrong; there is a place for multi-tasking on a handheld device. I would like that ability. I just don't see how "4-5 apps before it gets unwieldly" is really worth mentioning. (Cue up that "Everything's amazing, nobody's happy" video clip.)

From my playing around with TEAL OS, I concluded that I was likely going to be just as efficient using a Garnet launcher as the new webOS launch/flick/slide/whatever system. YMMV, but I don't see how this is a big deal.

"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)

Try to keep up, old man.
-Bosco
m105 -> NX70v -> NX80v -> iPhone -> iPhone 3G

I'll beat you to death even when I don't have my own teeth anymore, you punk.

Let's see if iPhone OS 3.0 requires all new hardware. What would that mean for you, cost-wise?

mikecane wrote:
Let's see if iPhone OS 3.0 requires all new hardware. What would that mean for you, cost-wise?

Apple has about 15 million iPhone users. I think it would be a very stupid move to introduce software that now alienates those people unless they upgrade a device that may have been purchased only a few months ago.

Also, I doubt they would bill the announcement as iPhone OS 3.0 if it requires new hardware. Apple focuses on its strong point. Presenting OS 3.0 without backwards compatibility is a huge weakness. Instead, they would show off the new hardware along with the new software, and a side-note would be no upgrades. Therefore, it is pretty obvious to me that new hardware is coming, but not required for OS 3.0. Some apps will require the newest hardware, just like some apps require an iPhone 3G for GPS or those that can't use the Touch.

Also, I'm stupid, so I'll probably buy the next hardware upon its release.
-Bosco
m105 -> NX70v -> NX80v -> iPhone -> iPhone 3G