So me thinks with new ipad arrival the limit will (should) stay at
20mb
and apps will have to pull the extra contents off the developer's
server.

Me thinks helper APIs that do the pulling using reachability
internally would come handy.
Along with itunes therered networking mode.

Thoughts?

AD <isquat@gmail.com> wrote:

> So me thinks with new ipad arrival the limit will (should) stay at 20mb
> and apps will have to pull the extra contents off the developer's server.

I saw somewhere that the limit was increased to 50 MB when iOS 5.1 was
released (at the iPad 3 announcement). Google search for "50 mb limit
iOS" shows several articles.

The app bundle must be delivered in a single block, and that has to
include all the user interface elements.

Apps could already download additional large data sets, with three
levels of retention under iOS 5.0.1 (or later):

- cached data which may be discarded by iOS if it needs the storage
- data which must be retained but is not to be backed up
- data which must be retained and backed up

> Me thinks helper APIs that do the pulling using reachability
> internally would come handy.

Can't comment on the API aspect.

> Along with itunes therered networking mode.

Since about mid 2009, iTunes has installed a USB driver which allows an
iPhone to offer tethering to the computer via the USB dock cable (adding
support for tethering from the new iPad as of iTunes 10.6).

Bluetooth tethering was also supported about the same time, and WiFi
tethering starting with the iPhone 4. As far as I know, these use
standard protocols and don't require a special driver.

Whether tethering works is dependent on your cellular carrier, the plan
you are on, and how they charge for it.

Or did you mean something else?

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

On Mar 21, 2:34=A0am, demp...@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> AD <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So me thinks with new ipad arrival the limit will (should) stay at 20mb
> > and apps will have to pull the extra contents off the developer's serve=
r.
>
> I saw somewhere that the limit was increased to 50 MB when iOS 5.1 was
> released (at the iPad 3 announcement). Google search for "50 mb limit
> iOS" shows several articles.
>
> The app bundle must be delivered in a single block, and that has to
> include all the user interface elements.
>
Right, me was thinking the textures and audio for extra layers,
not the potentially smaller GUI elements and the rest of the must
haves.

"Because of the new cap the usual pop up that warns users to switch to
WiFi when wirelessly downloading more than 20MB will not appear any
longer."

but that seems pretty stupid. iSteve would have objected to that.
Users must be given a chance to avoid the data plan ripoffs and a
warning before
pulling a shitload of data would've improved goodwill towards a
content provider tremendously.

> Apps could already download additional large data sets, with three
> levels of retention under iOS 5.0.1 (or later):
>
> - cached data which may be discarded by iOS if it needs the storage
> - data which must be retained but is not to be backed up
> - data which must be retained and backed up
>
right, there is also NSTemporaryDirectory() that returns app local /
tmp
that I'm not sure why needs to be cleaned up by the app rather than
iOS
on app startup/exit/delayed to low cpu load times after app exit

> > Me thinks helper APIs that do the pulling using reachability
> > internally would come handy.
>
> Can't comment on the API aspect.

but I can :-]

>
> > Along with itunes therered networking mode.
>
> Since about mid 2009, iTunes has installed a USB driver which allows an
> iPhone to offer tethering to the computer via the USB dock cable (adding
> support for tethering from the new iPad as of iTunes 10.6).
>
> Bluetooth tethering was also supported about the same time, and WiFi
> tethering starting with the iPhone 4. As far as I know, these use
> standard protocols and don't require a special driver.
>
> Whether tethering works is dependent on your cellular carrier, the plan
> you are on, and how they charge for it.
>
> Or did you mean something else?
>

I mean using (fast) host PC/Mac networking via usb cable rather than
saturating potentially unreliable wifi (admins in large corporations
would approve of anything reducing wifi saturation)

I have my choice of wifi networks now that I have pestered my employer
to buy airport extreme to serve 2.4ghz and 5 ghz bands on separate
networks
but users with cheap routers might not be as fortunate.

Esp with the very first ipad and it's shitty wifi hw implementation.

AD <isquat@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 21, 2:34 am, demp...@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
> > AD <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:

[...]

> > > Along with itunes therered networking mode.
> >
> > Since about mid 2009, iTunes has installed a USB driver which allows an
> > iPhone to offer tethering to the computer via the USB dock cable (adding
> > support for tethering from the new iPad as of iTunes 10.6).
> >
> > Bluetooth tethering was also supported about the same time, and WiFi
> > tethering starting with the iPhone 4. As far as I know, these use
> > standard protocols and don't require a special driver.
> >
> > Whether tethering works is dependent on your cellular carrier, the plan
> > you are on, and how they charge for it.
> >
> > Or did you mean something else?
> 
> I mean using (fast) host PC/Mac networking via usb cable rather than
> saturating potentially unreliable wifi (admins in large corporations
> would approve of anything reducing wifi saturation)

Ah, reverse tethering, for want of a better name.

You can of course download big apps using iTunes and then sync them to
the iOS device via USB. That doesn't help with app-specific big
downloads.

The tethering via USB that is supported by iOS could be adapted to
support going the other way, but only if the iOS device was jailbroken.
It would need a revised network priority order if the USB connection was
going to take priority over WiFi and cellular (and would need to hold
the USB network connection active if cellular was turned off), disable
the NAT and DHCP server, and act as a DHCP client.

Probably don't need any changes on the computer end - a Mac can be
configured to do Internet Sharing from its primary network interface to
the "iPhone USB" network, and I assume there is an equivalent mechanism
on Windows.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

In article
<a4a3cbe8-5cc9-47f3-babc-2f855bfe6db6@er9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, AD
<isquat@gmail.com> wrote:

> Esp with the very first ipad and it's shitty wifi hw implementation.

it wasn't shitty.

On Mar 21, 7:41=A0pm, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article
> <a4a3cbe8-5cc9-47f3-babc-2f855bfe6...@er9g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, AD
>
> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Esp with the very first ipad and it's shitty wifi hw implementation.
>
> it wasn't shitty.

Ok, put it the other way: it does not work with cheaper zyxel wifi
routers
and I'm yet to find a crappy zyxel (even a cheap one).

works fine on 5ghz network of airport extreme
(2.4 probably too but in a commercial building with a dozen wifi
networks, wireless phones, etc nearby why bother)

In article
<a73b4458-ccc7-49f0-b7bb-d2b5fd83fe37@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, AD
<isquat@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Esp with the very first ipad and it's shitty wifi hw implementation.
> >
> > it wasn't shitty.
> 
> Ok, put it the other way: it does not work with cheaper zyxel wifi
> routers
> and I'm yet to find a crappy zyxel (even a cheap one).
>
> works fine on 5ghz network of airport extreme

sounds like your cheaper zyxel is the problem, which is surprising
since zyxel products are generally very good.

> (2.4 probably too but in a commercial building with a dozen wifi
> networks, wireless phones, etc nearby why bother)

2.4gz will have better range than 5gz.

On Mar 22, 8:55=A0pm, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article
> <a73b4458-ccc7-49f0-b7bb-d2b5fd83f...@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>, AD
>
> <isq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Esp with the very first ipad and it's shitty wifi hw implementation=
..
>
> > > it wasn't shitty.
>
> > Ok, put it the other way: it does not work with cheaper zyxel wifi
> > routers
> > and I'm yet to find a crappy zyxel (even a cheap one).
>
> > works fine on 5ghz network of airport extreme
>
> sounds like your cheaper zyxel is the problem, which is surprising
> since zyxel products are generally very good.
>
> > (2.4 probably too but in a commercial building with a dozen wifi
> > networks, wireless phones, etc nearby why bother)
>
> 2.4gz will have better range than 5gz.

right,
i'm about 20 meters away from the routers though, direct sight with a
few wooden separators between workspaces
(it;s an open space office :-[ )