How to quit an app in OS 4.0?

nano8blazex

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 2, 2010
12
0
Now that iPhone OS 4.0 introduces multitasking, how do you actually quit an app (instead of allowing it to go "multitasking")?
 

DravenGSX

macrumors 6502a
Aug 20, 2008
577
51
"If you want to kill an app…you don’t have to. We architected something so the user doesn’t have to be the custodian of applications. We’ll give the apps in the foreground as needed. The user doesn’t have to worry about that at all. The user just uses things.

In multitasking, if you see a task manager, they blew it. Users shouldn’t have to ever, ever, ever think about that stuff."
 

nano8blazex

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 2, 2010
12
0
So if a user wanted to use all of his/her apps in succession (lets say 100 apps)... they'll just all remain open in the multitasking bar thing? Won't that... sortof slow the device down?
 

silver25u

macrumors member
Sep 20, 2007
83
14
Now that iPhone OS 4.0 introduces multitasking, how do you actually quit an app (instead of allowing it to go "multitasking")?

I understand it to be the same as it currently is. Multitasking is only activated when you double tap the home button to launch the multitask "bar". Only then would you have a background app .
 

STEVESKI07

macrumors 68000
Jan 6, 2009
1,648
1
Washington, DC
I read his response and kind of wondered the same thing. I think its one of those things that we will have to wait and see. I'm sure once the developers get their beta versions we will hear more about it.
 

vertigo235

macrumors 6502
Jun 6, 2009
442
0
I bet when that bar comes up with all your apps you can probably hold your finger on it until the X comes up then tap the X to close it.
 

nano8blazex

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Apr 2, 2010
12
0
I understand it to be the same as it currently is. Multitasking is only activated when you double tap the home button to launch the multitask "bar". Only then would you have a background app .
Hmmm... I was under the impression that multitasking would be activated as soon as you launched the app... probably im wrong. :)
 

outcastrc

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2009
70
0
BC, Canada
When I read what they were doing with multitasking I don't think it is true mutlitasking at all. There are going to be a few apple apis that your updated app is going to be able to use. When you close your app the app can feed information thru the api to you. Its just a fancier version of push.

With the inclusion of better save states you'll be harder pressed to know whether multitasking is actually working or not.

Hense you don't need to close any app as there is no app to close. Because there is no real 3rd party multitasking in the first place.

Thats what I got out of it anyways...
 

Eso

macrumors 68000
Aug 14, 2008
1,753
106
So if a user wanted to use all of his/her apps in succession (lets say 100 apps)... they'll just all remain open in the multitasking bar thing? Won't that... sortof slow the device down?
That just about seems right, actually. We'll have to watch the keynote video when it's released. The multi-tasking app bar could just be like your most recently run apps

I think Jobs is an idiot for comparing a task manager to a graphical system for choosing/closing an app.
 

NT1440

macrumors G5
May 18, 2008
12,176
14,210
So if a user wanted to use all of his/her apps in succession (lets say 100 apps)... they'll just all remain open in the multitasking bar thing? Won't that... sortof slow the device down?
Do you really think they didn't think about that??
 

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,899
1,125
Washington DC
It'll probably work like Safari. You know how it keeps 8 pages open? But if you run out of RAM it 'loses' the oldest pages and they have to re-load when you go back to them?

I bet the multitasking will keep the last few apps you used running, but if it needs to it'll just 'freeze' the app that's 5 or 6 down the line. The number will depend on how much of the resources your apps are using.

So some peole will get 8 apps running at once but some will only get 3 if they're really big things. Bottom line is, you don't have to worry about it.

That's my guess.
 

BaldiMac

macrumors 604
Jan 24, 2008
7,410
6,776
It's not a multitasking bar. It's just an app switcher. Third party apps don't run in the background. The 7 services that Apple listed run in the background, and are available for third party apps to tie into.
 

gloss

macrumors 601
May 9, 2006
4,811
0
around/about
When I read what they were doing with multitasking I don't think it is true mutlitasking at all. There are going to be a few apple apis that your updated app is going to be able to use. When you close your app the app can feed information thru the api to you. Its just a fancier version of push.

With the inclusion of better save states you'll be harder pressed to know whether multitasking is actually working or not.

Hense you don't need to close any app as there is no app to close. Because there is no real 3rd party multitasking in the first place.

Thats what I got out of it anyways...
This is correct. The entire application does not continue running, only the relavent APIs that allow whatever the app's core background functionality is to continue. So Pandora (as an app) is put into a save state, but its audio API is allowed to keep running so you still get the audio.

It's quite a good idea, actually.
 

matttye

macrumors 601
Mar 25, 2009
4,956
30
Lincoln, England
There's nothing to quit..

The apps state is remembered automatically, it's not actually running in the background.

Obviously if your pandora radio is playing in the background, to quit the app you'd just go back to pandora and hit pause/stop.

If something is tracking your location, you'd just go back to the app and tell it to stop tracking.

It's not "true multitasking" because it seems like some things are still going to be impossible - you can't receive a notification from an IM client while it's running in the background for example, you'd still have to rely on push notifications for that.
 

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,899
1,125
Washington DC
It's not a multitasking bar. It's just an app switcher. Third party apps don't run in the background. The 7 services that Apple listed run in the background, and are available for third party apps to tie into.
Yes, but I think it's fair to just label the 7 APIs as "multitasking."

My entire post is talking about those APIs and the fact that it's the APIs that will either keep or 'freeze' services depending on how busy they are.

But I think it's just a lot easier to say 'multitasking' to refer to all that.
 

Eso

macrumors 68000
Aug 14, 2008
1,753
106
When I read what they were doing with multitasking I don't think it is true mutlitasking at all. There are going to be a few apple apis that your updated app is going to be able to use. When you close your app the app can feed information thru the api to you. Its just a fancier version of push.

With the inclusion of better save states you'll be harder pressed to know whether multitasking is actually working or not.

Hense you don't need to close any app as there is no app to close.
Ugh, I hope not. What a swing and a miss.

Some apps are best if they don't save state.

Take the settings app, for example. Suppose the last time you went into settings it was to check your usage. You exit the app right from the usage screen. Somewhere down the line, you want to turn off WiFi. When you launch settings, you don't want to be back at the usage screen, making your have to navigate all the way back to the top of the hierarchy.

On the other hand, what if you are in the middle of setting up an email account and have to cross reference all your account information with Safari (ingoing/outgoing server info, port settings, account info)? In that case, you don't want to start at the beginning screen each time and lose your place.

Take the USAToday app. When you launch the app, it always starts at the front page so you can see all the updated news for the day. You don't want to have to navigate backwards each time from when you last quit the app within an article from three days ago.

But then again, what if you want to look up something from a story in Safari? You want to get back to your place in the article when you return.

I don't think Apple gets it.
 

matttye

macrumors 601
Mar 25, 2009
4,956
30
Lincoln, England
Ugh, I hope not. What a swing and a miss.

Some apps are best if they don't save state.

Take the settings app, for example. Suppose the last time you went into settings it was to check your usage. You exit the app right from the usage screen. Somewhere down the line, you want to turn off WiFi. When you launch settings, you don't want to be back at the usage screen, making your have to navigate all the way back to the top of the hierarchy.

On the other hand, what if you are in the middle of setting up an email account and have to cross reference all your account information with Safari (ingoing/outgoing server info, port settings, account info)? In that case, you don't want to start at the beginning screen each time and lose your place.

Take the USAToday app. When you launch the app, it always starts at the front page so you can see all the updated news for the day. You don't want to have to navigate backwards each time from when you last quit the app within an article from three days ago.

But then again, what if you want to look up something from a story in Safari? You want to get back to your place in the article when you return.

I don't think Apple gets it.
A simple way to get around that would be to single tap an app you want to run from its saved state, then double tap or push and hold an app you want to run from its home page.

Whether or not they've thought about that, I don't know, but they'll probably address it in an update. I think most people would rather have a slightly annoying implementation than one that saps battery life.
 

BaldiMac

macrumors 604
Jan 24, 2008
7,410
6,776
Yes, but I think it's fair to just label the 7 APIs as "multitasking."

My entire post is talking about those APIs and the fact that it's the APIs that will either keep or 'freeze' services depending on how busy they are.

But I think it's just a lot easier to say 'multitasking' to refer to all that.
I agree with you, but I was referring to the bar in particular. It has nothing to do with which apps are currently running in the background.
 

Eso

macrumors 68000
Aug 14, 2008
1,753
106
I think most people would rather have a slightly annoying implementation than one that saps battery life.
Oh, god. Will the whole "multi-tasking kills the battery life" myth die already?
 

BaldiMac

macrumors 604
Jan 24, 2008
7,410
6,776
Oh, god. Will the whole "multi-tasking kills the battery life" myth die already?
It's not a myth. It's just often used in hyperbole. Controlled multitasking (either by the system or the user) may have limited impact on battery life. Out of control multitasking can kill battery life.

You bring up the task switcher, long press the icon of the app you wish to close, it starts shaking, you hit the minus icon, it closes.
Did you just make that up?