Ok, I've installed some Jailbreak-only software now. Well, a bit more that is..

Winterboard - a theme engine for the spring board. Not making extensive use of it yet and I haven't themed Springbord itself, but I'm using the hooks this provides for a few other things...

SBSettings - a quick pop-up to allow toggling various features/functions that would otherwise be buried in the settings app or in other apps. The default is to swipe on the top menu bar to pull this up. One of its other features is hiding applications, which I've already used to hide the Phone (can't use it with data-only), Messages (can't use it with data-only), Calculator, iPod, Clock, Notes and Stocks default apps. Along with hiding the Winterboard app icon since you can access its settings from the Settings app.

SBMatte theme icons - The only set of icons for SBSettingss that looked better than the originals - other themes are scary ugly. http://www.macthemes.net/forum/viewtopic.php?id=16793176

OpenSSH - nice being able to get to a command line remotely or use SFTP

iFIle - filesystem exploring right from the iPhone itself.

I want to install something to provide some status on the lock screen in addition to the time. There are a few things I'm looking at and will have to update once I've chosen. - LockInfo it is for now.

Just made some updates to the list in the first post. I'll be filtering down the list over time, but some categories/classes are going to need more than one app.

Just confirmed this today... If you're using iOS 4.0 it is close to mandatory that you also Jailbreak if for one simple reason: Background app management.

iOS 4 does not provide a way (that I know of) to manually quit an application, and unfortunately many app developers completely suck. That's what happens when you have such a popular platform, everyone and their mother suddenly becomes a developer.

(Late) Last night my iPhone was at 100% charge as I removed it from a powered speaker dock as I went to bed. This morning, about 8 hours later, it had no charge left. Just enough to show a red sliver on the battery meter as I tried to power it on.

I'm just about 100% certain this was caused by Squeezecast, an application that acts as a Squeexebox, enabling playback of music from Squeezebox server. The app is insanely buggy and I have no idea how it was approved except for complete lack of testing on Apple's part. It must have continued to consume copious resources even after music playback had stopped.

Under normal conditions you'd have to reboot the phone to get this app out of memory. Having a jailbroken phone however one need only have SBSettings installed with its ability to quit all background processes. Definitely a battery saver.

Doesn't the builtin multi tasking killer remove it from the background ? It certainly kills apps when I use it (I haven't used Squeezecast though).

I didn't mean to imply that all multi-tasking apps were, or were going to be, a problem.

The issue seems that it will only come up when a badly written app is used. TomTom for example, will pop up a notification to tell you it's gong to shut down or go to sleep when you are no longer using it and put it into the background.

If the iOS is itself supposed to shut down apps, then that mechanism is either not working properly or something the app is doing is preventing iOS from shutting it down. Perhaps it's reporting back that it's still in full use, so it doesn't get shut down.

Squeezecast was $6 - not expensive in the grand scheme of things, but quite a premium price for this type of app in the iOS market. It's a pretty basic client and doesn't have much functionality on its own. That's another reason it's so irritating that it's so bloody buggy.

Another nice feature of SBSettings is its ability to list apps currently running in the background. The iOS multi-tasking bar unfortunately lists all recent apps, whether or not they're in the background. It gets crowded pretty quickly.

I'm confused.

The fact that Squeezecast keeps running in the background is a feature. It is supposed to do that so you can keep playing music while doing other things.

Apps that are registered as media players get to continue running in the background.

Or are you saying that you stop the music in Squeezecast and it keeps burning lots of CPU.

You didn't answer my question, does the iOS task bar manage to kill Squeezecast or not ?

P.S. I'm not claiming that the whole multi-tasking bar is the idea solution to how a phone multi-tasking bar UI should work, it just about gets the job done, but it is clearly a v1.0 feature

My iPhone has started using unusual amounts of charge in the last few days, need to work out what is draining it. Might not be third party app multi tasking at fault, I had it in the past at one point with 3.1.1

They shouldn't be burning an entire battery's worth of power while sitting IDLE and not in the foreground though. They should be asleep, not consuming any power at all until activated once again (fast app switching).



That's exactly what I'm saying. I mentioned that I had stopped the music and stopped using the app.

The funny thing is that even when trying to use it normally it will drop the connection to the server on a whim, I wonder if it kept the connection alive al night when I wasn't actually playing anything.



Apparently not. And, without jailbreaking, there's absolutely no way you'd know if it did either. As I mentioned, recent apps are also listed in the bar and there's no way of knowing which are currently being used and consuming CPU, which as just sitting in memory dormant (fast app switching) and which are not in memory at all (simply used recently).

If your phone is jailbroken you should get a detailed process listing and check what's using CPU and memory. I'll be doing this myself later tonight when I have some time.

I guess at least then you'll be able to prove whether or not using the multi-tasking bar is killing the app.

As I hinted to above, it is possible to see that fast battery drain without any third party backgrounded apps involved. Or at least it has been in the past, as well as my 3G doing it for a while (as documented on a thread here somewhere) I've seen it happen occasionally on my wife's 3G as well. I haven't seen it happen since she moved to 3.1.2 though.

Really? I recall you mentioning some quick battery drain issues, but I didn't remember it being over the course of only 6-8 hours - especially without ever touching the phone during that time period.

Ok, it turns out that the iOS "task bar" does allow you to manually quit running apps. If you press and hold on an icon, they'll start to wiggle with a delete badge on them - like when removing or moving items in the springboard. If you click the badge, poof, the app goes away. I tested to make sure Squeezecast actually stopped playing music. I was under the impression that this action on the task bar would only remove the icon but leave the app running - I thought I recall Apple saying that app management was intelligent and happened automatically so you didn't have a manual task killer. Glad I was wrong.

Last night before going to bed I wiped all running tasks using SBSettings and this morning I woke up to a full battery meter. I'll try to test Squeezecast again tonight by starting a stream, stopping it and then putting the phone away for the night.

I take it you didn't read any iOS 4.0 reviews, where this was all covered extensively

I like to experience things myself rather than have everything spoiled by a review. Or more than likely, I probably just forgot, since I bought the iPhone so long after its release.

That said, Squeezecast is still buggy and not a very good app citizen. One thing I do quite like about it (and something Amp doesn't have yet BTW), is its ability to replace the iPod app in the music playback pop-up (left of the task bar).

Now if I can only find out how to prevent the iPod and Phone apps from always auto-launching.

EDIT: Couldn't locate anyone talking about stopping the native apps from auto-launching so I just went in via SFTP and change the bundle identifier on the MobilePhone and MobileMusicPlayer apps - now they won't launch when the device boots. They can still be located and launched with Spotlight though, and they still register for their respective supported URL types. I could have disabled all that with more edits as well, but I don't want to change anything that may create instability or a break a dependency. This is good enough for now.

Thought you knew about closing apps from the taskbar.

What I'm finding troublesome - it seems that all apps now stay active. Even those that don't really need to. (Stanza)

I'm pretty much convinced that the clutter of unclosed apps eventually causes problems. Several times I've seen my touch4 get a little slow/wonkey only to have the problem solved by a restart. The touch2 with ios3 never had that kind of problem.

What you can't tell from the multitasking bar is which apps are actually consuming CPU versus just resident in memory versus not in memory at all.

It's so easy to click a single button in SBSettings to close every open app, versus using the multitasking bar to close one at a time - there could be 10 to 20 apps listed on there.

Tired of looking through reviews trying to piece together an opinion of a number of apps, I've gone on a small shopping spree today and picked up a number of things I want to check out. Tomorrow I'll need to grab a few more apps and then I'll put them through their paces.

Some of the apps I picked up today: ABContacts, GV Mobile +, a couple of camera apps and one more I can't remember right now.

Biggest disappointment so far: GV Mobile+

Not the App's fault I suppose, it's just that Google Voice is sort of a lame duck. I still fail to see the point in it without voip integration. It's basically calling treatments and voice mail - sort of like a simplified PBX I suppose. Something you already get with most VOIP providers.

You can't actually make outgoing calls with Google Voice. Incoming calls must be forwarded to another active number. It saves voice mail to an email-like mailbox and it has SMS.

To me, SMS is the only interesting bit - because everything else I already have with two VOIP providers.

What I CAN fault GV Mobile+ for is its lack of support for other telephony programs on iPhone, such as the many dedicated (branded) and SIP-based VOIP apps. It seems to only want to use the built-in MobilePhone app, which means it's not going to be possible to use it for outgoing calls.

I think I'm just going to spend my time evaluating all the SIP-based software. And instead of GV Mobile+ I can probably get away with an SMS-only app that uses GV to keep things cleaner. GVM+ will be revisited once it gets its promised/announced VOIP support.

Bruno, you knew I was going to defend a Google product

I'm sorry but you're just going to have to take my word for it that Google Voice in general (I have no idea about that app), is in no way a "lame duck." I can't speak to GV Mobile+ but the service its self is fantastic. I use it daily, and it handles all calls to my business number and my cell number, both on the same phone.

I'm amazed how much you downplay the good features of the service, like the voicemail inbox. Maybe it's because you've used Apple/AT&T's visual voicemail, but I don't have access to it. What I do have is Google Voice which does it for free, presents it in a very simple layout that looks just like GMail, and allows me to archive all my messages. I only text using Google Voice, and can respond to people from my phone or computer (using the GV site or a Chrome extension). I can initiate a call directly from the inbox.

The following are some thoughts on the positive features of Google Voice, so there's a record of the good things about it that you either glossed over or didn't bother taking time to discover before dismissing it:

With my webcam's microphone, I can answer calls to my GV number directly on my computer. The call rings on my phone, but also on my desktop.

I can use GV for far cheaper international calls than my carrier charges (I don't use it, but others might).

When a call comes in on my GV line, I can record it with the press of a button (it alerts the caller of the recording), which is good when I'm driving, and the recording is saved in my inbox.

I've had a problem with sales calls in the past couple months. That is, until I remembered that I can easily block calls by going to my GV inbox and identifying it in the call log.

On a day to day basis, I use GV to let me carry the same phone for personal and business calls. For personal calls, I dial out with my cell phone number, and for business I dial out with my GV number (I'm given the choice when I place the call). This is actually less important to me these days because...

I've actually started using my GV number for all calls. The main reason this is possible is because I can assign personalized greetings for each caller or groups of callers. I didn't need to use my GV number for personal calls, but people started wanting to text me (I hate texting), and I don't have a plan with my carrier, so now I just tell people my GV number and I can text for free.

Related to the last two points, some time ago Google added the ability to use GV for your cell number in addition to your GV number. This let me take my carrier out of the loop entirely.

Lastly, I'm actually not the prime target for Google Voice. Initially, the idea of Grand Central (which Google purchased and turned into GV), was to give you two things:

1) a single phone number for all your current phones
2) the freedom to leave your other numbers. There's a few examples I can think of for this.


Those are the big features I can think of for the moment.

Also, why did you decide to try a 3rd party app for GV when the official one FINALLY made it through the ridiculous app store approval process about two weeks ago?


As for VOIP: you are right that Google Voice is not a VOIP service, and this is a strangely pervasive misconception. Every time I hear someone talking about installing it, they say something like "and now I can talk for free!" not understanding that it still uses their minutes. My hope is that one day they'll integrate Gizmo5 into the service, but that's probably far off...

The only people I've seen comment positively about GV are those who don't seem to have any experience with VOIP service or other telephony services offering call treatments.

I can comment on some of the points you made tomorrow when I have some time, but keep in mind that I don't care about using a fake phone from my computer - besides, that's VOIP, and what you're experiencing is likely an offshoot of the Gizmo5 acquisition, even though it may be wrapped in a GV UI. That feature is not part of GV outside of GMail that I know of - certainly not possible to do it with GV from a mobile on a data connection.

BTW, I have no experience with ATT service or Apple's visual voice mail. I have had visual voice mail since 2004 or so using different VOIP services - they have all supported sending voice mail (and even faxes) to email. So you can have whatever UI you want, all depending on your email client (or web mail, including GMail, if that's what you want). The voice messages are just wav files and faxes tifs.

You've explained yourself, so I'm going to leave this argument before I put more fuel on it

All I can tell you is that the service is invaluable to me and does everything I want it to. It has nothing at all to do with whether I've used VOIP services before. If you don't want to use it, that's fine and I respect that. I hope you can understand why it's useful to me.

Matt, I'm not saying it's not useful. I said it was a lame duck. And by all accounts and the hoopla it's (not) getting, my assessment seems to hold water.

Its use is greatly diminished when you already have those capabilities, which a lot of people do. At that point GV doesn't bring much to the table other than redundancy. As mentioned, I did give it props for SMS, which most people will not have with other non-cell-based calling plans. It does also bring potentially "free" routing where not everyone is necessarily with a "free" provider with such options.

I was using it last night, so I'll give you my example.

Using GVM+ I initiated an outgoing call with the "direct dial" option. I called my home number. GVM+ sent me to my regular Phone dialer and popped up some strange number on the screen. So it has to call some random number to connect me to the number I actually want to talk to. I can understand this. GV sets up the call routing on its end and then patches me into a number that its temporarily set aside for my call - that call has been connected to my real destination on their end.

People mention the same thing on incoming calls. That the caller ID they see comes up completely randomly, such that they can no longer use that ID to text or call someone back for instance.

I did hear that the GV client for Android is much better than the official client for iPhone, but I've also heard that the GVM+ I was trying was very good. I just don't see how the experience in Android can get around limitations that others are expressing online.

You mentioned that you could take your carrier out of the loop. How? Since GV doesn't itself have VOIP how can you actually place or receive a call? GV does routing but where will it route the call to/through?

Ok, if you can come up with a use-case for me personally, you'll have accomplished something Google has been unable to. I believe I've mentioned previously that the whole GV thing is convoluted and ambiguous enough that a great many people don't see a use case - or see the wrong one and then get pissed off that it doesn't work that way.

Here's what I have now:

At home I have VOIP with a phone number I've been using for 6 years. It's a coveted (in this area) 416 number. It has call routing if I choose to use it and voicemail delivered to email. I'm using an ATA device to which that number is locked. So to physically bring that number somewhere else I have to move the ATA.

I also have a voip.ms account with (currently) two phone numbers (one US and one Canadian), but I can have however many numbers I want. I can route those any way I like. voip.mshave full SIP support so I route those numbers through completely new hardware, including soft phones and my own PBX if I wanted to.

I have an iPhone with a 3G data-only plan. It is connected to the net anywhere I go, either through WiFi (with a decent support of hotspots) and that 3G connection.

I have a Google Voice account and number. I used a US voip.ms number to register.

I want to use that data-only connection for voice as well - keeping voice costs to a bare minimum. Right now I am testing various voip apps along with my voip.ms sip information.

I can't write much at the moment, but what I'm hearing is "I already have what Google Voice offers, so I don't need it and therefore it's a useless product." That seems a little ridiculous to me. I don't have any other means of getting anything that GV offers me, so GV is a great product (and free, too). And I disagree that tons of people have the features that you're describing.

I also still think that chastising the service for not being VOIP, when it never claimed to be VOIP, is odd.

And no, I don't get the problem where a random number shows up on the caller ID, either for incoming or outgoing calls. I understand why it uses this, and it's never been a problem for me. It really sounds like this is an iPhone issue.

I should have clarified what I meant by "taking my carrier out of the loop" (and you have to ascribe at least SOME context to what I was saying at that point, Bruno). GV essentially lets me use my cell carrier as a dumb pipe. I'm not dependent on them for a cell phone number or a voicemail box (and SMS, of course).

If I have time later I'll make an attempt (which will be in vain) to give you a reason to use GV. But since you already have many of the services it offers, and assume that the majority of everyone else does too (which is not the case), and it's also impossible to convince you of anything at all, I'm not sure if I'll get around to it.

Matt, are you purposefully trying to get me into an argument? You're obviously not getting from my posts what I'm intending.



I've already gone out of my way to specifically say that's not the case. By calling the product a "lame duck" I didn't mean to imply it was useless. I would have said "useless" and some other colorful hyperbole if that's what I'd intended. It's just a non-starter for many people, either because of feature duplication, poor positioning/brand-messaging or even implementation. Forget for a moment that it's also only available to those with US phone numbers.

I will compare it to the Apple TV (previous generations if you will). In the grand scheme of things, it is currently small potatoes, similar to Apple's "hobby" stance on the ATV. It has just not achieved significant mind-share.

A lame duck can still serve the purpose of an otherwise healthy one if what you intend is to eat it.




You have the same possibilities as I or anyone else should you want to. If you don't already have something else, then it may make perfect sense to go with GV - we both agree "free" is nice.



I did no such thing. And you're toeing the same line that I've seen so many other people. What I said was that some (other) people criticize it because they were mistaken about this. I'm fully aware of this aspect and what I've said is that GV is not as strong a solution without VOIP. So they should add it sooner rather than later if they want to make this product a complete solution. I really don't know what Google's motivation is behind GV, so while I've heard VOIP is coming, who knows when or if it will ever actually debut. Or when one might start seeing/hearing targeted ads.



The iPhone experience is mine, but what I'm reading elsewhere is from both iPhone and Android users.




That's fair. But you are dependent on them for minutes. And that's the big piece I want to avoid. Voice is data anyway, so I only want to pay the carrier for a data plan.

I know there are also differences between cell plans in the US and Canada (and the rest of the world) that can make the GV proposition better/worse depending on where you'll be using it, in terms of minute usage and feature duplication.



It won't be in vain if you can spot something I've missed. Again, I find the features useful, but they must also be easy to use and as least convoluted as possible. In the end I don't care how I achieve them if the goals (including price) are satisfied.



I didn't say this either. Just that a lot of people do. Enough that it ends up being a contributor to why GV is not this run-away train of a success story, like say for instance the iPhone, Android, Facebook, etc.



You don't have to convince me of anything. I'm already sold on the idea, I just have to see how fitting GV into the mix can benefit me.

Encountered my first casualty of Jailbreaking.

The newest update to All of Wikipedia has put in some kind of check for Jailbroken devices and the app quits itself if run on such a device.

The developer includes a small note on their app page about it. According to them, most people with Jailbroken devices are pirating their software, and they have to pay for hosting costs for the wiki download, so they've denied access to the app for anyone with such a device.

Currently I'm out $10 for an app that does nothing. I've written to the developer and Apple. To Apple I've requested a refund. To the developer I've tried to enter into a dialog and offered up some suggestions on how they might achieve their goals without using this harsh method - and failing that, a refund.

Jailbreaking itself doesn't allow you to run software with mismatched or no DRM. You'd still have to install additional software that patched parts of the OS to allow that. If they want to check for something, they should check against a patched install daemon as an example.

One of my proposed solutions was to offer legitimate Jailbreak customers an alternative way to prove their copy is legitimate. This can possibly be done in a number of different ways, so let's see if they're willing to explore it.

As a power-user or enthusiast app, I'm sure they must have a large number of legitimate Jailbreak customers.

EDIT: Apple have refunded my purchase. I'm still waiting for a reply from the developer. I do still ant this app and will gladly repurchase it if they can come up with a better solution to their problem.

EDIT2: Developer has replied with some background information and was very pleasant in fact. I believe we'll be able to work this out and I'll no doubt be repurchasing the app. Hopefully the situation will also be able to be resolved for all their legitimate customers with Jailbroken phones.