[solofx7]

I know everyone is going to tear into me for this, but:
I do not see the need or desire for multitasking on the iPhone/iPad.
Other than music, and a couple of specialty situations, I do not see a practical use for this.

Other than the obvious hardware software thing, Apple is selling an experience more than anything.
From computers to cell phones and everything in between, I generally think that consumers are tired of problems and high complexity in electronics.
This is where Apple steps in. I generally think that OSX and iPhone OS is a closed system.
Yes, you can do nearly anything that you want on them, but I still think that they are closed because Apple controls them to a certain extent to deliver a consistent user experience.
I will get back to this shortly.
But the point is multitasking.
So, having multiple programs open on your home machine makes sense with the evolution of high powered multicore processors.
But for a highly mobile electronics, other that laptops, I have never truly seen the need.
I think that many open running processes on a mobile device like a cell or an iPad would take a huge chunk of performance, thus a hit on the user experience.
Now for the more tech savvy person that would know that they have multiple processes going, this is not an issue, but for the general population that "simple" devices like a cell phone or an iPad would be for, I think this would kill the experience that Apple is going for and selling.
Would you truly trust controlling multitasking to your mom or grandma?
I dont think so, and other than tech savvy people, the Apple mobile electronics are geared toward the masses, and the experience needs to be consistent, fast and without high maintenance levels.
One processes running, having availability to all memory and CPU cycles, power, managed by the system is the "closed" system/experience that Apple is selling to everyone.
I do not think that "tech" people are the only market.
I am not saying that those are the only people that want or would benefit from it, but those are the people that are clamoring most for this it would appear.

Also think about it this way, other than flash, what is the one big thing that people that have touched and used the iPad are saying? Speed.
That is not by mistake, again, it is the experience that they are selling.
We expect good looks, usability, consistent experience, low maintenance from Apple, and that is what they have to deliver. Apple does not "have" to give us multitasking, a camera, or many of the other requested items in the first gen-iPad.
There were a ton of other things they had to get right first, and they did.
Just remember the gen1 iPhone, there were things that people said were missing there, that was a closed system i.e. no direct ability to run apps on the system. Remember the web apps?
Apple needed to get the phone out there, get the experience right and get the right customer response.
It was not needed to squeeze everything in gen1 just to say it was there.
Most electronics are a progression, and I am pretty sure that is what is going to happen with the iPad.
Also remember this, background processes running with, or without your knowledge will kill this experience of mobile electronics experience more so that regular OS's just given the nature of the product.
Not meant to be fanboyish, but Windows anyone, the is exhibit A.

[Simon]

I think I'd agree there. On the iPhone (the iPad may be different) what I want running in the background is music, calls (that would include Skype though!), SMS, email checking, and notification. I don't really need other apps (let's say a game or browser) to keep running while I'm doing something else.

And the way I see it all those things (minus Skype) work in the background already today. So if ultimately I'd have to chose between this vs. full multitasking with half the battery life, I'd definitely want to stick with the status quo. OTOH if Apple figures out a way to make multitasking work well with my 256 MB RAM and my already limited battery life, I guess I'd be ok with it. I just doubt that's possible.

[Andy8]

I'd like instant messaging running in the background, while i was using other applications.

[solofx7]

oh, and another side note.
Battery life if already bad enough, I do not want multitasking to make it worse.
And the last thing that I need is one more thing that I should watch on my mobile device.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Andy8 

I'd like instant messaging running in the background, while i was using other applications.

It's called push and works just fine as is.