Yeah, that is certainly one good workaround for that (or using another app like Paper or Friendly perhaps).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Facebook Aware of iOS App Battery Life Drain Issue and Working on a Fix
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I realized this a couple weeks ago.. There is a solution that doesn't require you to delete the app since like everyday is talking about.
You just got to remember to force close it when you leave it. Since I've started doing that it is showing 0 background activity and it has gone from 30% of my battery to 3%.
I also am someone that has background app disabled on ALL apps.
You just got to remember to force close it when you leave it. Since I've started doing that it is showing 0 background activity and it has gone from 30% of my battery to 3%.
I also am someone that has background app disabled on ALL apps.
The problem is that iOS 9 got more informative and now allows users to easily "see" what's running behind their backs. I've had background refresh off for Fb since the capability existed in iOS, and only with iOS9 do I see it's being a sneaky f*&^%r! Just like those apps that insist on setting your location services to "Always" with no option for "While Using", but have no good reason to need to know your whereabouts when the app isn't on screen ...I usually set them to "Never" until I launch the app.
Facebook today acknowledged its awareness of an issue raised by a few iOS users last week, who saw large amounts of battery drain on their iPhones while the social networking app ran in the background, even with background app refresh toggled off. Speaking with TechCrunch, a Facebook spokesperson confirmed the company's awareness of the bug and promised a fix would be in place "soon."
MacRumors Forum member Oridus suffering from the Facebook battery drain bug
A number of Facebook users have commented on the issue of background battery drain over the past week, with users on the MacRumors Forums posting about the issue as far back as last Thursday. One poster (seen above) saw Facebook responsible for a dramatic 39 percent battery usage over a six day period, despite having background app refresh set to off.
Several sites have attempted to theorize on the cause behind the overzealous battery drain, including MacStories, hypothesizing that the reason behind the bug could be silent audio emanating from the service's auto-playing videos. Since most people don't bother with turning off auto-play, Facebook could be keeping a muted audio track running in the background with users largely unaware, letting it run and "consume energy to perform background tasks" even after leaving the app.
The company itself hasn't commented on the source of the bug, but at least those affected can look forward to a fix for it in the future.
Article Link: Facebook Aware of iOS App Battery Life Drain Issue and Working on a Fix
Same with anything I find breaking the rules, its too late for a fix as I deleted it a few days ago due to its unscrupulous nature, and the fact I don't like my privacy being invaded by some Dev on a federal mission.
Last edited:
You might have background refresh disabled but that doesn't disable the ability of apps to run in background which is built into iOS and has been for years. That said, as you mentioned, closing an app will prevent it from running in the background.
What's the privacy invasion?The problem is that iOS 9 got more informative and now allows users to easily "see" what's running behind their backs. I've had background refresh off for Fb since the capability existed in iOS, and only with iOS9 do I see it's being a sneaky f*&^%r! Just like those apps that insist on setting your location services to "Always" with no option for "While Using", but have no good reason to need to know your whereabouts when the app isn't on screen ...I usually set them to "Never" until I launch the app.
Too late for a fix as I deleted it a few days ago due to its unscrupulous nature, and the fact I don't like my privacy being invaded by some Dev on a federal mission.
You tell me why it needs to run in the background, and I'll tell you where the privacy invasion is.
Edit: you can't be certain why it's running! Key logging maybe? Microphone use? Camera use?
Pretty much all of those require explicit permission from iOS to happen, and others can't even happen due to sandboxing in iOS. Seems that nothing is pointing to a privacy invasion of any sort aside from random guessing without anything to support it (the app running in the background on its own doesn't show that).
Fb is supposed to require permission to run in the background! That didn't stop them circumventing permissions either.
They cheated. You're attempting to defend the indefensible.
My question to you is: Why?
Where am I defending anything at all?
Simply discussing the implied "privacy invasion" that was brought up (which is separate from the whole thing of the app being able to run I the background indefinitely or longer than most apps are normally allowed to).So breaking the rules isn't a privacy concern?Where am I defending anything at all?
Even their updates aren't explained further than some generic "...we update every two weeks..." BS! Where's the transparency? and why stop at just the one rule break if no one realises you're doing it? Damn straight it's a "bug" ...of the type that spies on its users.
Okay let's discuss! What makes you so certain it's not invading your privacy?
Breaking the rules is breaking the rules, it depends on what happened. Something running in the background longer than an app should be doesn't mean there's a privacy invasion (there could certainly be one, but there would need to be something pointing to it). Let's not say one is the same as the other when that's simply not the case. Just because there's a problem (a bug or something happening the shouldn't be happening) doesn't mean privacy has been invaded (not unless there's something that shows or at the very least has strong implications that that's the case).
I'm not certain of anything in particular in relation to this, I'm simply asking that if someone is saying there's a privacy invasion that hopefully they have something that supports that. Things don't work in a way where someone makes a random statement and then it's on someone to disprove it, things work in a way where if a statement is made then there should be some reasoning for that statement where support is provided for it.
What about when people post an exhaustive list of all the shiny Apple products they own in their forum sig? Are you saying that FB is kinda like that?
So you trust the Dev didn't implement this deliberately?
Facebook is a multi-billion dollar corporation, not some garage startup with two students trying to enhance the user experience. They know what they're releasing and the full extent of its capabilities, but they're not telling us. I mean; does it really need to be 100Mb's heavy when the majority of what we see & interact with is web based?
I don't trust them, so my thinking is as I've stated. They've breached the little trust I had in them - and that was only because I was able to limit their access to my phone's content and abilities ...or so I thought. Now it seems that limitation is not enough because they don't play by the rules.
But Hey... You're fine with big business breaking the rules, right?
That has bugged me for some time. Why does Apple allow them to give pointless update notes? The same crap cut-and-pasted every time is simply a waste of time. Is FB worried people will skip the updates once they really know what BS advertising and tracking features they've loaded in this week?
Worse, other app makers are starting to follow suit.
It seems that you are either not following what I'm saying or ignoring it. Something broken or something being done to go against the rules isn't a good thing and needs to be dealt with--as I mentioned a number of times--but it's not related to a privacy invasion, unless there's something to support that (which is what I was following up on originally). I'm not really sure how much more clearly that can be laid out.So you trust the Dev didn't implement this deliberately?
Facebook is a multi-billion dollar corporation, not some garage startup with two students trying to enhance the user experience. They know what they're releasing and the full extent of its capabilities, but they're not telling us. I mean; does it really need to be 100Mb's heavy when the majority of what we see & interact with is web based?
I don't trust them, so my thinking is as I've stated. They've breached the little trust I had in them - and that was only because I was able to limit their access to my phone's content and abilities ...or so I thought. Now it seems that limitation is not enough because they don't play by the rules.
But Hey... You're fine with big business breaking the rules, right?
What your saying *could* indeed happen for most companies, but by now we expect Facebook to know *precisely* what its app is (or is not) doing, and have it fixed and working properly.
I'm suspicious of Facebook by default, because of their need to entangle themselves into my phone and personal life.
If Facebook reportedly has the best coders on Earth, either they are doing a crappy job in reality OR they are charged to insidiously invade our privacy.
That seals it then! All the "proof" needed is contained within the one link ...NOT.
I've not addressed your question because you've evaded my question! It remains: How do you know it's not deliberate?
Are you also the type that believes everything Obama tells you? That believes everything FOX News broadcasts? That has no truck with "big brother" warnings? That does not believe your constitutional rights are being eroded?
It's all down to perspective. I've stated mine, While you sit with the fence firmly wedged between your cheeks.
I don't know if it's not deliberate or not, as I've mentioned before, but not knowing that doesn't mean there's a privacy invasion. I've asked about what would indicate that there is a privacy invasion when it was brought up, clearly after a number of exchanges it seems like there isn't anything to indicate it (aside from just someone thinking that that could be the case). That takes care of answering the question I brought up, so there isn't really a need to keep on going in circles since nothing new is coming out of that.
Your claiming to be okay with the breaking of rules is cause for concern.
I sincerely hope you're not, & never will become, a Developer.
You are repeatedly making it clearer and clearer that you are obviously either not reading what I've been writing or (willfully or not) ignoring it, as I've clearly mentioned more than a few times that I'm not OK with something not working correctly and that it needs to be addressed. (And that that is all separate from the part of what I was actually following up on, which was a reference to a privacy invasion.)
Exactly what I have been doing! I seriously only used the app for like 2 weeks. Then, it was solidified when they mandated the messenger companion app.
No not really. The cycle is cumulative. So if you drop to 75% then charge back to 100 you have only used 1/4 of a cycle. Do that 4 times and you have used 1 full cycle. Thats how it works. Technically its better not to allow it to drain all the way. Also at night while you sleep, its using part of your cycle for nothing. May as well have it on the charger saving those cycles. Not to mention your device is ready for a full days work.
Li-ION technology is different than the old school ni-cad and it prefers to be charged in small doses.