tl;dr: Killing apps manually forces them to terminate, while the system will only do so if they break some rule, or it has a need (memory or otherwise). Given the fact that a suspended (but not terminated) app can register for notifications, (think WhatsApp and message updates, or any location-enabled app), while the documentation clearly specifies that terminated apps do not receive notifications... this article and tip are wrong.
Lesson is: check the documentation, rather than make educated guesses.
Yes, please do check the documentation. Remote notifications CAN cause your app to wake up and receive the notification. As of iOS7.
"The aps dictionary can also contain the content-available property. The content-available property with a value of 1 lets the remote notification act as a “silent” notification. When a silent notification arrives, iOS wakes up your app in the background so that you can get new data from your server or do background information processing. Users aren’t told about the new or changed information that results from a silent notification, but they can find out about it the next time they open your app."
it appears that apps that were terminated by the OS (not by someone swiping in the so-called "app switcher" or on device reboot) will be re-launched if the rights flags are set in the app and in the remote push notification.
If Apple wanted to make it really easy, the app switcher could somehow allow people to distinguish between recent apps and apps that are currently running so they don't try to swipe away every single app.
That would be a nice addition, but I do see a wrinkle if there is a 5 minute winner for, say, a file being added to Dropbox that hasn't completed uploading. and it's killed prematurely. This might need something more than just a symbol showing it's actively using background processes, but perhaps some info as you how much longer it will be running before it times out or the file finishes uploading. And what if an app isn't responding properly, will that show up correctly; meaning, is iOS smart enough to know when an app is behaving badly?
"The aps dictionary can also contain the content-available property. The content-available property with a value of 1 lets the remote notification act as a “silent” notification. When a silent notification arrives, iOS wakes up your app in the background so that you can get new data from your server or do background information processing. Users aren’t told about the new or changed information that results from a silent notification, but they can find out about it the next time they open your app."
it appears that apps that were terminated by the OS (not by someone swiping in the so-called "app switcher" or on device reboot) will be re-launched if the rights flags are set in the app and in the remote push notification.
Yes, exactly my point. User action is handled differently from 'pure OS decisions', as it should, and as expected by the user. What could be more annoying than the impression that the iPhone does whatever it thinks is best, whatever your own decisions? That really would be obnoxious behaviour
Also, I'm poking around an Android app currently. I much prefer the iOS model, however constrained the developer is, from a pure "user" point of view.
Also, I'm poking around an Android app currently. I much prefer the iOS model, however constrained the developer is, from a pure "user" point of view.
We've hired a consulting company to "port" our iOS app to Android. Based on working with them on that, Android has a lot more constraints at the developer level. Very annoying when told they can't do something in an efficient manner and have to come up with a hack to make whatever it is we want done work right.
Well wouldn't it just make sense for Apple to show which Apps are running and consuming CPU/Battery and which are nothing more than a recent Apps item?
I usually force quit MAPS after use, WAZE, and any other sat nav. I also force quit TANGO from time to time. I have to also wonder why some Apps don't have a way to cleanly exit.
Double click should really show running apps. Swipe left from the home page should show recent items sorted based on what you normally do at the time of day if you must! Keep the two things separate instead of letting people guess...
Regularly closing apps that you use often then reopening them when you want to use them WILL drain your battery faster than leaving them open all the time.
It's the equivalent of a plane taking off or landing where that is the use case where they drain fuel the most.
Yes there are apps like Facebook that suck the life out of your battery when "doing nothing" but these are often the exception to the rule.
Some apps showing in app switcher are using the Apple's backgrounding API, others use background refresh, and yet others are not doing anything and are just shortcuts to recently used apps.
Apple needs to display some sort of distinguishing sign to tell those apart in the App switcher. I used to use jailbroken apps that had the option to tell them apart.
It's also worth noting that one of the biggest criticisms that Android advocates use to criticize iOS is that there really isn't any true "background" multitasking in iOS. And that is absolutely true. There isn't.
Except there is background multitasking and background services that are continuing to use battery. Music continues to play in the background and also Messages, turn by turn directions, Hey Siri, Software Update, App Store, Find my Phone, Location services, FaceTime, Mail, Calendar, App Notifications, Wifi, Bluetooth, Phone, Podcasts, Clock, Reminders, iCloud, iBeacons, Audio Recording, News, VOIP, etc can all be running in the background, not sleeping. Not all are apps but also services as well. It is really up to the app developer or services programmer to make a responsible background app. There is a lot that could be going on in the background.
GPS apps can continue to GPS your location even when they're in the background.
That would require "real" multitasking and all the trolls know that iOS can't do "real" multitasking, as they've stated millions of times over the years.
The devil is in the details. This article is not long enough and detailed enough to fully explain the who (app name), why, what, and how of the iOS and when to close and when not to close apps. This concept of not bothering to close apps might be efficient in some cases, but I think there is a whole lot of "it depends" that is not being explored in this brief article.
For example, the Waze app. Anyone who has used Waze knows full well that it sucks major battery life even in the background. And if it's sucking that much battery, the processor must be involved as well to some degree. Now the newly updated Waze app (came out yesterday I believe) states that it uses less battery power in the background than the previous version, AND it has a power off button that puts the app to sleep so as to not use any battery or processing power while in the background. Obviously that implies that without using the power off button, it would use power while in the background. Therefore the author's assumption that apps do not use the battery or processor while in the background is absolutely flawed.
Some apps, and even when it's not that they are ignoring the setting, they are just using tricks to get around it (like Facebook playing the silent audio).
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot
That's an interesting article. And the apparently thorough explanation lends it some credence. However, it's still a 3rd party. Unfortunately, the Apple Support article you cited is inadequate in its explanation too. Apple needs to quit talking down to its users and give REAL information.
I agree, Apple could do better in trying to clarify this. If it were up to me, I'd take out the ability to swipe up from the multitasking screen and put it somewhere in the settings, with some text explaining when you need to use it, and that it's pretty much never necessary to "quit" all your apps at once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
If Apple wanted to make it really easy, the app switcher could somehow allow people to distinguish between recent apps and apps that are currently running so they don't try to swipe away every single app.
You can do that if you jailbreak (or at least, you could in prior iOS version). Either way, apps that are still "running" aren't eating away at battery life, just RAM, and that RAM is freed up as deemed necessary.
During the iOS presentation for iOS 4 (when multitasking was introduced), Steve Jobs stated that if you have to have a task manager in an OS then you're doing it wrong, and he is right. With just a few exceptions (like Facebook), leaving apps open in the background will have no noticeable affect on battery life or performance.
"However, many users mistakenly believe that *ALL* apps shown in the app switcher are currently running in the background on their phone, draining performance and battery. That's incorrect."
Misbehaving apps can be shut down by removing it from the app switcher. These misbehaving apps can take up resources on your phone, thus causing it to slow down or become unresponsive. In the past, the battery on my iPhone drained rapidly if I used Skype and didn't shut it down when I was finished.
Not all apps can (or need to) do things in the background.
I was in the store a few days after iOS 9 came out for battery issues, he said they'd recently changed to recommending this now.
I suspect this is because the technician does't know what the user might have been using or which app is misbehaving so removing them all from the app switcher is a way to end all processes. The usefulness of this does not make the article incorrect though.
Hey Neil, if not closing apps works for you, great. Not everyone's situation is the same.
Closing apps that do drain my battery are getting shut down. Because they drain my battery.
You're not solving the problem as to why they are draining the battery. You haven't even shown any evidence that those apps you are closing are clearly drawing the battery when simply sitting in the background literally doing nothing that you requested them to. As previously stated many, many times, there are Battery usage stats and per app Settings that can be adjusted to resolve issues without the constant rigamarole of going into your recently used app list and removing them regardless if they are running in the background or not.
This may be true is some instances... but it's not true for me at all. Not only do certain apps drag the battery down with impunity, but can make the phone sluggish.
I think in theory this is supposed to be true, but the reality is that it's not.
This article is very false. You can run a true test by watching those apps even after a reboot with them in the background. Use iTools and watch the memory usage when they are running vs not running. They use RAM and RAM equals speed. Maybe when we close our background processes it stops them from spying or collecting data.
There are in fact many apps that run in the background and *do* drain battery while doing so. Just to pull a few common names out of a hat: Maps, Google Maps, Facebook (et al.), fitness and activity tracking apps, etc. How much power these apps draw in the background depends in large part on which services they are using. If they do background updates (as many news and social media apps do), that uses wifi and drains battery. If they use GPS in the background (as mapping apps do), then they drain even more battery. All apps with background processes also consume RAM, and if many of these are left open, the performance of the device can be impacted.
The fact is that, in total contradiction of the author's main point, quitting apps *is* effective in stopping their background activities, saving battery, and freeing up memory for other apps. Of course another way to do that is to go to the settings to and turn off background activities, location tracking, and cellular data access — but that takes more time, and one would have to turn all of those things back on next time one wants to use the apps, so in fact simply quitting the apps is the fastest way to deal with them.
Another issue that concerns many users is privacy. Many apps track users' movements when left on in the background. Again, the only ways to stop that tracking are either turning location access off (and back on again next time you need it) or simply quitting the app. Once again, contrary to the author's advice, quitting is the most effective way to deal with snooping apps.
Actually, believe it or not, this guy is right. There used to be a time when we didn't have the Background App Refresh Setting, in phones with much less memory, and a version of iOS far less intelligent than todays. Apps are going to use different APIs based on their primary function. If GPS is one of them or even if it has access / ability (change that setting in your preferences / settings rather than just force quitting). Doing this repetitively for no reason can cause memory leakages and an unstable system. MUCH better off managing your settings properly and being a mindful, intelligent, and well-informed iPhone user, than beating it in the head with the mindless swipe of your finger. If the app is frozen, crashed, missing UI elements, acting odd, close it out, and restart the App, that is what it is there for. If it was a good idea to close out all your apps, don't you thing there would be a "close all" button somewhere???
Comments
This is highly inaccurate.
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/iPhone/Conceptual/iPhoneOSProgrammingGuide/TheAppLifeCycle/TheAppLifeCycle.html ---> App Termination.
tl;dr: Killing apps manually forces them to terminate, while the system will only do so if they break some rule, or it has a need (memory or otherwise). Given the fact that a suspended (but not terminated) app can register for notifications, (think WhatsApp and message updates, or any location-enabled app), while the documentation clearly specifies that terminated apps do not receive notifications... this article and tip are wrong.
Lesson is: check the documentation, rather than make educated guesses.
Yes, please do check the documentation. Remote notifications CAN cause your app to wake up and receive the notification. As of iOS7.
from: https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/NetworkingInternet/Conceptual/RemoteNotificationsPG/Chapters/ApplePushService.html
"The aps dictionary can also contain the content-available property. The content-available property with a value of 1 lets the remote notification act as a “silent” notification. When a silent notification arrives, iOS wakes up your app in the background so that you can get new data from your server or do background information processing. Users aren’t told about the new or changed information that results from a silent notification, but they can find out about it the next time they open your app."
based on this: http://blog.layer.com/how-we-leverage-ios-push-notifications/
it appears that apps that were terminated by the OS (not by someone swiping in the so-called "app switcher" or on device reboot) will be re-launched if the rights flags are set in the app and in the remote push notification.
That would be a nice addition, but I do see a wrinkle if there is a 5 minute winner for, say, a file being added to Dropbox that hasn't completed uploading. and it's killed prematurely. This might need something more than just a symbol showing it's actively using background processes, but perhaps some info as you how much longer it will be running before it times out or the file finishes uploading. And what if an app isn't responding properly, will that show up correctly; meaning, is iOS smart enough to know when an app is behaving badly?
Yes, please do check the documentation. Remote notifications CAN cause your app to wake up and receive the notification. As of iOS7.
from: https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/NetworkingInternet/Conceptual/RemoteNotificationsPG/Chapters/ApplePushService.html
"The aps dictionary can also contain the content-available property. The content-available property with a value of 1 lets the remote notification act as a “silent” notification. When a silent notification arrives, iOS wakes up your app in the background so that you can get new data from your server or do background information processing. Users aren’t told about the new or changed information that results from a silent notification, but they can find out about it the next time they open your app."
based on this: http://blog.layer.com/how-we-leverage-ios-push-notifications/
it appears that apps that were terminated by the OS (not by someone swiping in the so-called "app switcher" or on device reboot) will be re-launched if the rights flags are set in the app and in the remote push notification.
Yes, exactly my point. User action is handled differently from 'pure OS decisions', as it should, and as expected by the user. What could be more annoying than the impression that the iPhone does whatever it thinks is best, whatever your own decisions? That really would be obnoxious behaviour
Also, I'm poking around an Android app currently. I much prefer the iOS model, however constrained the developer is, from a pure "user" point of view.
Also, I'm poking around an Android app currently. I much prefer the iOS model, however constrained the developer is, from a pure "user" point of view.
We've hired a consulting company to "port" our iOS app to Android. Based on working with them on that, Android has a lot more constraints at the developer level. Very annoying when told they can't do something in an efficient manner and have to come up with a hack to make whatever it is we want done work right.
I usually force quit MAPS after use, WAZE, and any other sat nav. I also force quit TANGO from time to time. I have to also wonder why some Apps don't have a way to cleanly exit.
Double click should really show running apps. Swipe left from the home page should show recent items sorted based on what you normally do at the time of day if you must! Keep the two things separate instead of letting people guess...
It's the equivalent of a plane taking off or landing where that is the use case where they drain fuel the most.
Yes there are apps like Facebook that suck the life out of your battery when "doing nothing" but these are often the exception to the rule.
Apple needs to display some sort of distinguishing sign to tell those apart in the App switcher. I used to use jailbroken apps that had the option to tell them apart.
It's also worth noting that one of the biggest criticisms that Android advocates use to criticize iOS is that there really isn't any true "background" multitasking in iOS. And that is absolutely true. There isn't.
Except there is background multitasking and background services that are continuing to use battery. Music continues to play in the background and also Messages, turn by turn directions, Hey Siri, Software Update, App Store, Find my Phone, Location services, FaceTime, Mail, Calendar, App Notifications, Wifi, Bluetooth, Phone, Podcasts, Clock, Reminders, iCloud, iBeacons, Audio Recording, News, VOIP, etc can all be running in the background, not sleeping. Not all are apps but also services as well. It is really up to the app developer or services programmer to make a responsible background app. There is a lot that could be going on in the background.
GPS apps can continue to GPS your location even when they're in the background.
That would require "real" multitasking and all the trolls know that iOS can't do "real" multitasking, as they've stated millions of times over the years.
For example, the Waze app. Anyone who has used Waze knows full well that it sucks major battery life even in the background. And if it's sucking that much battery, the processor must be involved as well to some degree. Now the newly updated Waze app (came out yesterday I believe) states that it uses less battery power in the background than the previous version, AND it has a power off button that puts the app to sleep so as to not use any battery or processing power while in the background. Obviously that implies that without using the power off button, it would use power while in the background. Therefore the author's assumption that apps do not use the battery or processor while in the background is absolutely flawed.
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon
Except that setting is ignored by apps.
Some apps, and even when it's not that they are ignoring the setting, they are just using tricks to get around it (like Facebook playing the silent audio).
That's an interesting article. And the apparently thorough explanation lends it some credence. However, it's still a 3rd party. Unfortunately, the Apple Support article you cited is inadequate in its explanation too. Apple needs to quit talking down to its users and give REAL information.
I agree, Apple could do better in trying to clarify this. If it were up to me, I'd take out the ability to swipe up from the multitasking screen and put it somewhere in the settings, with some text explaining when you need to use it, and that it's pretty much never necessary to "quit" all your apps at once.
If Apple wanted to make it really easy, the app switcher could somehow allow people to distinguish between recent apps and apps that are currently running so they don't try to swipe away every single app.
You can do that if you jailbreak (or at least, you could in prior iOS version). Either way, apps that are still "running" aren't eating away at battery life, just RAM, and that RAM is freed up as deemed necessary.
During the iOS presentation for iOS 4 (when multitasking was introduced), Steve Jobs stated that if you have to have a task manager in an OS then you're doing it wrong, and he is right. With just a few exceptions (like Facebook), leaving apps open in the background will have no noticeable affect on battery life or performance.
"However, many users mistakenly believe that *ALL* apps shown in the app switcher are currently running in the background on their phone, draining performance and battery. That's incorrect."
Misbehaving apps can be shut down by removing it from the app switcher. These misbehaving apps can take up resources on your phone, thus causing it to slow down or become unresponsive. In the past, the battery on my iPhone drained rapidly if I used Skype and didn't shut it down when I was finished.
Not all apps can (or need to) do things in the background.
I was in the store a few days after iOS 9 came out for battery issues, he said they'd recently changed to recommending this now.
I suspect this is because the technician does't know what the user might have been using or which app is misbehaving so removing them all from the app switcher is a way to end all processes. The usefulness of this does not make the article incorrect though.
Closing apps that do drain my battery are getting shut down. Because they drain my battery.
You're not solving the problem as to why they are draining the battery. You haven't even shown any evidence that those apps you are closing are clearly drawing the battery when simply sitting in the background literally doing nothing that you requested them to. As previously stated many, many times, there are Battery usage stats and per app Settings that can be adjusted to resolve issues without the constant rigamarole of going into your recently used app list and removing them regardless if they are running in the background or not.
This may be true is some instances... but it's not true for me at all. Not only do certain apps drag the battery down with impunity, but can make the phone sluggish.
I think in theory this is supposed to be true, but the reality is that it's not.
There are in fact many apps that run in the background and *do* drain battery while doing so. Just to pull a few common names out of a hat: Maps, Google Maps, Facebook (et al.), fitness and activity tracking apps, etc. How much power these apps draw in the background depends in large part on which services they are using. If they do background updates (as many news and social media apps do), that uses wifi and drains battery. If they use GPS in the background (as mapping apps do), then they drain even more battery. All apps with background processes also consume RAM, and if many of these are left open, the performance of the device can be impacted.
The fact is that, in total contradiction of the author's main point, quitting apps *is* effective in stopping their background activities, saving battery, and freeing up memory for other apps. Of course another way to do that is to go to the settings to and turn off background activities, location tracking, and cellular data access — but that takes more time, and one would have to turn all of those things back on next time one wants to use the apps, so in fact simply quitting the apps is the fastest way to deal with them.
Another issue that concerns many users is privacy. Many apps track users' movements when left on in the background. Again, the only ways to stop that tracking are either turning location access off (and back on again next time you need it) or simply quitting the app. Once again, contrary to the author's advice, quitting is the most effective way to deal with snooping apps.
Well, i should change my habit from now on. I thought it would get more memories if i forced to close the apps.