iPad's iPhone OS and Multi-tasking

[Evan]

Considering the iPad utilizes the iPhone Operating System, there is no reason to think that when iPhone OS 4.0 hits the scene, the iPad won't be receiving the update as well.

But, there are some questions to ask.

One, involves iPhone OS 3.2. While we can't say for sure, it seems that iPhone OS 3.2 was not just optimized for the iPad, but in fact created for the iPad specifically. Will iPhones be upgraded to 3.2 before the release of 4.0? It's doubtful, specifically because 3.2 was made for the iPad. A lot of the changes in the OS, like pop-up menus, make sense on the iPad, and not on the iPhone or iPod Touch. So, while there is talk that iPhone OS 4.0 will bring multi-tasking to the table, does that mean we will have to wait for iPhone OS 4.1 before we can see it on the iPad?

Two, are updates. The iPhone and iPod Touch get updated in unison, because they are essentially the same devices. And while there are people out there who would love to preach that the iPad and iPhone/iPod Touch are the same as well, that's simply not the case. We see that there are enhancements to the iPhone OS in 3.2, specifically for the iPad. Are future updates of the iPhone OS going to roll out in sync from this point on, when they must include the iPad in those updates? Or, will there be a lag between the two device's updates?

And lastly, multi-tasking. Perhaps one of the biggest gripes of Apple's tablet, is the fact the unit doesn't have this function. As was mentioned above, it's rumored that iPhone OS 4.0 will introduce this feature to the iPhone, in an official capacity. Does the iPad really need multi-tasking? Considering the iPhone has been without it for three years, and still lead the industry in innovation, does the iPad really faulter because of no multi-tasking? And, perhaps more importantly, if multi-tasking does make it to the iPad, will Apple revolutionize the feature?

If you've got more questions, let us know! The potential of the iPad is a great point to talk about. Even dream about.

[niuniu]

For instance, when we talk about green energy, the production of green energy requires lots of land (wind and solar farms, plantation of sugar, palm oil etc for ethanol) while other sources like gas, coal and nuclear don't require too much land. At one point, the latter would become greener than the former as the latter's costs (costs as in full cost account, including its effect to environment) increase vis-a-vis the latter.

[niuniu]

It should be on both. The iPhone should have been on all airlines, since it's beginning. Exclusivity as the iPhone has had with AT & T illegally in other countries. It is ridiculous and dwarfs sales. The limitation of the consumer, the one that is poorly support a terrible decision. be locked PlayStation did it again by AT & T. There are many people who want the iPhone, but refuse to a carrier that they do not want. This argument is tired and should no longer exist. It is nothing but nonsense and frustration for the customer (or potential customers), since IOS finally the world of modern mobile operating systems combined. m4v to avi converter It's funny how people always say 'go to the carrier that does what you want first'�� I've certainly never done that. I jumped from tmo to Cingular to get an actually useful WM phone back in the day, and stuck with AT&T to get the iPhone when it came out.