If I had to guess (I do) Apple is recording information about cellphone towers and WIFI networks the device sees. This information is then at some point anonymized and submitted to Apple to populate/update their location database that all Mac OS X 10.6 and iOS users utilize to know their approximate location in absence of GPS.
If it is easy to access such as is suggested I agree Apple should evaluate a better way...
It is also possible that it isn't recording your location but storing tower/wifi location information for the general area you are currently in (or have visited recently) to allow quick location estimates in absence of GPS when you don't have active network access.
...clearly a temporary reality. Developers will update apps or release new apps utilizing these features (and the many others now available in iOS 4) over the coming months... or be faced with a competitor coming in with a better app. Several of the most popular apps that would benefit from multi-tasking are either already updated or in the approval process.
If your app plays audio (for whatever reason) it WILL run in the background. (audio background mode)
If your VoIP app needs to maintain a network connection with a backend system so it can be told of incoming calls it WILL run in the background but only when network traffic is incoming or at a time you designate so you can keep your network connection alive. (voip background mode)
If your app needs to track your location it WILL run in the background with the level of location accuracy you designate. (location background mode)
(you can combine any combination of the above modes)
If your app needs to finish an active task, one that is not easily paused, it WILL run in the background.
If your application needs to do things at predetermined time you can schedule it and your app WILL run in the background.
The original iPhone was announced in January 2007 but didn't get released until June 2007. The iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS got announced/released in June/July time frame in 2008 and 2009 respectively.
So the trend is to refresh the iPhone every year mid-year.
I doubt any iPhone hardware update with be announced in January given this trend.
The are transferring a LOT of power over these links using direct current. The only way to do that without a high-level of line loss, huge heat issues and/or insanely high-voltages is by using super conducting material.
What really is needed is LONGER super conducting DC corridors across this country not shorter ones. Use these DC long haul corridors to interconnect various existing AC grids allowing a high level of power distribution/load sharing with lower power transmission losses.
Anyway ignore the 22 sq miles tag line... This is just three DC trunks going between three AC/DC conversion substations that are connected to each of three existing AC grids.
It would be perfect to have a small simple and single connection between a laptop, enhanced iPhone/iPod, or *cough* tablet *cough* and an external display (power would be the only other connection needed, unless the proposed connector contains power pins). The display would contain ports for hardwire networks, USB, firewire, speakers, "web" camera, microphone, eSATA, etc. (much like Apple's and others current display products).
This would be Apple's answer to docking stations that often have rather large fixed connector(s) in slots on the bottom side of a laptop. Having a USB like connector gives you more use case coverage then the docking connector solutions currently and could be used by many more form factors other then just laptops.
I am fairly sure this is Apple's main goal with a secondary goal being the following...
As time passed USB, firewire, etc. - assuming adoption - could be replaced by this technology so you would get displays/hubs for this technology... all working with a single connector/cable type (likely will need mini variants). Storage devices, video cameras, video devices, audio devices, and sync targets like MP3 players, etc. would be perfect candidates to switch to this (assuming power and cost budgets make sense).
By using an optical connector you can get longer distances and higher-data rates. Also many more options to improve throughput, etc. as optical transceiver/coding technologies improve without having to create new connector types.
If the communication technology used inherits and expands on FireWire... a single connector could mux several independent streams of data, including timing sensitive streams with low CPU overhead (later obviously would be needed at the data rates being talked about).
No most of those don't really help since most are well out-of-date with current iPhone OS and hardware.
1. Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) - SUPPORTED
2. Stereo Bluetooth / A2DP support - SUPPORTED
3. Selecting, copying, and pasting text - SUPPORTED
4. Horizontal keyboard for e-mail and notes - SUPPORTED
5. Improved predictive text (or the ability to turn it off) - UNSURE of improvements
6. Integrated IM application - 3rd party apps
7. Flash support - NOPE
8. A better camera and a camcorder - SUPPORTED
9. Unified e-mail inbox - NO but now have global search
10. Voice dialing and voice memos - SUPPORTED
9. More storage, 32GB - YUP
10. Forward text messages - SUPPORTED
It is backlog related to the iPhone 3.0 OS release. A lot of existing applications have been submitted with fixes/enhancements related to 3.0. Also Apple has a larger test suite to run against the application submitted, validating 3.0 and 2.x compatibility, etc.
As a guess... I give it another month or so for things to calm down.
If I squint my eyes and try focus behind the image I think a see a tea pot... or maybe two whales humping? Cool 3D effect!
Exactly what is the POINT of running a poll then, if they are going to pay no mind whatsoever to the results?
To see if a truly good name popped up that they didn't think about and that they happened to like as well.
I too would have loved to see it named Serenity.
This is NASA giving the middle finger to Serenity fans, no other way to interpret it. Dumb, dumb, stupid, idiot move, NASA. Way to be pricks for no good reason.
Page rendering is rather fast on the iPhone when supplied by WiFi which easily exceeds 3G data rates in all but the rarest of situations. It isn't a CPU issue. Now it could be a 3G chip set issue... however I bet it is primarily latency that is killing fast rendering when using 3G. 3G latency is bad in general and given how "native" the Mobile Safari accesses websites it feels the full effects of this latency (unless a pre-fetching proxy, etc. is assisting the phone pipeline things... which is what BB does IIRC).