Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Perhaps there's something else in play in your scenario, but for most people closing Waze will stop it from running in the background as well. And certainly goes for most other apps, as we've certainly seen demonstrated by many in relation to Facebook, for example, in various threads where its background process has been discussed and that closing the app would stop it.

We can also look at yet another article about multitasking at http://appinstructor.com/blog/2014/background-app-refresh-explained that has excerpts from Apple's own support information about it all, which, in part, mention the following:

"If you force an app to quit by dragging it up from the multitasking display, it won't be able to do its background activities, such as tracking location or responding to VoIP calls, until you relaunch the app. "

[doublepost=1457725096][/doublepost]

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201330

Nothing usual about my situation, though we know from the Facebook app that developers sometimes try to game the system. Perhaps that was the case with Waze, and it's different now, I really don't know. All I know is what happened and that I wasn't interested in using Waze after I discovered what it was doing in the background.

The article you cite isn't particularly helpful in that it refers to forcing an app to "quit," and then cites as a reference Apple's support information that uses the terminology of forcing an app to "close" (in the case of it becoming unresponsive). Apple is perhaps oversimplifying the issue somewhat by using this language instead of speaking more technically about iOS app states.

Anyway, I wasn't planning on becoming anywhere close to this engaged in this discussion interesting though it may be. The main takeaway that I hope everyone gets from it is that users will only rarely have any reason to delete saved suspended states. It's a useful thing to know about I suppose but it is not a maintenance method or requirement of iOS. Let your device do this work for you, and be happier and more productive. And that's all I have left to say about it.
 
I
[doublepost=1457685793][/doublepost]

Don't worry, you might still learn a couple more things to help you make sense of it all.

well I didn't imagine "refresh firefox", "cold boot" "format" "quit and restart" "delete plug-ins" "delete toolbars" "if all else fails, do a factory restore"
 
On Android, developers don't need those cheats. Apps can run in the background and when they do, there is an icon for the app in the top of the screen beside the time. No hidden apps running in the background (there is a cheat sone apps use, transparent icon). It is up to the user if they want to let the app run in background or not.

Under iOS, it seems users are babysat by Apple.
That sounds horrible. So you definitely have to go around closing them all the time? Really, when I'm away from home with my phone, I have better things to do than to use my phone like a PC.
 
Last edited:
Makes sense. Unlike Android, iOS is designed to intelligently manage apps/ram usage in the background which is why you don't need a "Clear all" button like what exists in the Android multitasking menu.

Android also has intelligent management.

In fact, when Apple finally added app multitasking in iOS 4, they used almost exactly the same model of "freezing" apps when they're pushed into the background, as Android had already been using.

In both OSes, most apps are paused in place, doing nothing, ready to be started again as-is. In both cases, the least-used apps are automatically removed if memory is needed. In both cases, the apps that are about to be removed can implement a special method to store state.

This methodology is nothing new with mobile OSes. Heck, even Windows Mobile from 1999 was designed to ask the least used apps to give back memory. Unfortunately (unlike Android and then iOS) it required the app's cooperation, so it rarely worked automatically.

That sounds horrible. So you definitely have to go around closing them all the time?

No, you don't have to go around killing apps on Android, any more than you have to kill them on iOS.

--

As for someone's comments about swiping away some month old iOS apps to get Safari to cache some pages, I wonder if Apple did something they've done before: dedicate X amount of RAM for shared system stuff like web caching and task switcher app images. If so, perhaps it's actually the stored screenshots that caused the problem.
 
Last edited:
I forget what app it was, but I noticed something was trying to play silent audio today. I noticed because it conflicted with the music I was playing. It was either Snapchat, Facebook Messenger, or Yik Yak.
 
No, you don't have to go around killing apps on Android, any more than you have to kill them on iOS.

Some apps are so poorly designed, like Tumblr, that if you don't kill every other app and run a memory management app to constantly free memory then the app will repeatedly crash.
 
Some apps are so poorly designed, like Tumblr, that if you don't kill every other app and run a memory management app to constantly free memory then the app will repeatedly crash.

That's likely more about poorly written apps that ask for a ton of memory and don't handle the case where they don't get it.

Sometimes there's just not enough memory available for a request.
 
How does that scale to dozens of apps?
[doublepost=1457662588][/doublepost]
And do you think it is good app design if there is no way to use the app without having to force-quit it? Imagine you'd regularly have to force-quit an app because the app froze up. Wouldn't that be the apps problem and not Apple's problem (since it is hardly difficult to create apps that don't freeze up regularly and hardly difficult to create apps that don't use excessive power while in the background)?

There's no doubt in my mind it's a crappy app. Nowhere did I imply it wasn't. However, that doesn't change the fact that force quitting this app from the background saves battery. Correct? I'm fairly certain that Apple stated closing apps in the background does not save battery life. They offered no qualifiers about "good apps" vs "bad apps", hence their statement is completely false.
 
There's no doubt in my mind it's a crappy app. Nowhere did I imply it wasn't. However, that doesn't change the fact that force quitting this app from the background saves battery. Correct? I'm fairly certain that Apple stated closing apps in the background does not save battery life. They offered no qualifiers about "good apps" vs "bad apps", hence their statement is completely false.
I think what Apple meant is that there is no need to systematically force-quit all apps to save battery life. It's only necessary to force-quit the really bad apples.
 
Quitting apps only frees up RAM. If your phone is running slow quit what you don't need to free up RAM. Especially Garageband apps that are in the background or large media stuff like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rastapopoulos
Quitting apps only frees up RAM. If your phone is running slow quit what you don't need to free up RAM. Especially Garageband apps that are in the background or large media stuff like that.
It certainly frees up RAM (and iOS does most of that on its own too), but it seems part of the point in all of this is that in some instances it can help with some app that might be doing things in the background (that you don't want or need) and is using up some battery related to that until its closed.
 
I have been saying this for years. And yes there are a few exceptions to this but for the most part you don't need to force quite any app unless the app is acting up (or glitching). I hate when people try to argue this point who clearly don't know how iOS manages the apps. Closing them will force iOS to have to reload the app every time you reopen it and burn more battery in the process. It would be like if every time you got to a red light in your car and turned off the engine then turned it back on when it turned green. You end up burning more gas. Apps work very similarly (with the execution of a few apps like Facebook that seem to run a ton of stuff in the background but as I don't use Facebook I can't verify how much it actually effects the battery).
[doublepost=1458026567][/doublepost]
In my experience quitting apps that are running in the backdrop absolutely improves battery life...


In my experience and that of many others I have talked to it does nothing for the most part
 
  • Like
Reactions: chabig
I have been saying this for years. And yes there are a few exceptions to this but for the most part you don't need to force quite any app unless the app is acting up (or glitching). I hate when people try to argue this point who clearly don't know how iOS manages the apps. Closing them will force iOS to have to reload the app every time you reopen it and burn more battery in the process. It would be like if every time you got to a red light in your car and turned off the engine then turned it back on when it turned green. You end up burning more gas. Apps work very similarly (with the execution of a few apps like Facebook that seem to run a ton of stuff in the background but as I don't use Facebook I can't verify how much it actually effects the battery).
[doublepost=1458026567][/doublepost]


In my experience and that of many others I have talked to it does nothing for the most part

You were doing so well until you did the car comparison...

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/engine-stop-start-systems-save-fuel-at-low-cost.html
 
Same as iOS, android will kill the oldest app if RAM is needed for the current app.

Not always true. I have found Apple's RAM management to be mediocre.
RAM issues were pervasive with 1GB and much better with 2GB however there are still apps that you may have to go in and "kill" items stored in RAM via the task list.
My 6S+ is generally very good but there always comes a time when it starts acting a bit wonky. I go in and clear the task list and it starts running significantly better.Wish it had a "Clear All" button.
[doublepost=1459183223][/doublepost]
Craig is right. Just bear in mind that he has been asked two questions:

1) does he kill multitasking apps frequently?
2) is killing of apps necessary for battery life?

he answered no and no. Both answers make sense to me.

Perhaps should he had been asked if running a poorly written app (Facebook) can have a measurable impact on battery life when run/not-run in the background he would have given a different answer.

That is a politicians answer.
Splitting hairs and aligning the facts that fit, rejecting those that don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Number-Six
That's beside the point. It's a feature that saves gas where it is used. Extra fuel is only used on initial startup. Stopping an engine at an intersection is nothing like loading an app, was the point.


No I mean turing the engine all the away off not just coming to a stop at a light lol
 
No I mean turing the engine all the away off not just coming to a stop at a light lol

Start / stop systems do that very thing. Sorry if what I said was confusing. Starting an already warmed up engine does not waste more gas than leaving it running.
 
Start / stop systems do that very thing. Sorry if what I said was confusing. Starting an already warmed up engine does not waste more gas than leaving it running.

Yeah, his point was good, but the analogy bad...the analogy doesn't really work at all.
 
I have been saying this for years. And yes there are a few exceptions to this but for the most part you don't need to force quite any app unless the app is acting up (or glitching).

Shhh I think it's sort of like prayer. We all know it doesn't do anything but it makes some people FEEL better. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: chabig
Shhh I think it's sort of like prayer. We all know it doesn't do anything but it makes some people FEEL better. ;)
Well, except for various scenarios where it actually plays a role, as described throughout this thread.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.