<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Andie's Log - Latest Comments in Some thoughts on the iPhone single-task magic</title><link>http://andie.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://andie.disqus.com/some_thoughts_on_the_iphone_single_task_magic/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:22:25 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Some thoughts on the iPhone single-task magic</title><link>http://log.andie.se/post/131921822#comment-12450052</link><description>&lt;p&gt;True, good point. Let's see what happens! I'm certainly not against&lt;br&gt;multitasking as such. And with more people being used to how the iPhone OS&lt;br&gt;works in general, it becomes easier to add more complexity. But I still&lt;br&gt;think it has been crucial to the success of the OS so far that it is so&lt;br&gt;simple in this aspect.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Andie Nordgren</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:22:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Some thoughts on the iPhone single-task magic</title><link>http://log.andie.se/post/131921822#comment-12293887</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think you're wrong. I can think of several ways to streamline the multitasking UI with the one button that is there. Mind you - it would not be the first time Apple designed more functionality into fewer buttons than previously thought possible, while still making it more or less intuitive to the user.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Al</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:03:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Some thoughts on the iPhone single-task magic</title><link>http://log.andie.se/post/131921822#comment-11931110</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Of course the iPhone OS can multitask on a technical level, and also  &lt;br&gt;does it for several core system apps (of which the music player is  &lt;br&gt;one), that's not what the text is about. It's about how apple is  &lt;br&gt;restricting multitasking in the OS for product design reasons rather  &lt;br&gt;than technical or performance reasons.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;/Andie&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Andie Nordgren</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:50:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Some thoughts on the iPhone single-task magic</title><link>http://log.andie.se/post/131921822#comment-11930920</link><description>&lt;p&gt;iPhone OS is just a version of  UNIX. Of course it can multitask, and it does.&lt;br&gt;Only that it does it with native apps and not the third party application.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Rimantas</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 08:40:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Some thoughts on the iPhone single-task magic</title><link>http://log.andie.se/post/131921822#comment-11881216</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Kind of thought I was doing something wrong  - when the i-touch wouldn't multi-task.  I just assumed that a devise (this complicated) was capable of it.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I understand the clarity of a single app design philosophy - but kind of prefer the illusion of incompetency disguising the inability to multi-task (but it will play music while I play with non-audio apps...)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">J3F</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:29:36 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>