The more I play with the new 3G, the more disappointed I am in Apple's decision to not allow apps to run in the background. This is why there are no To Do's that allow alarm reminders, or IM programs that alert us to a new message unless it's opened. I really think they're handcuffing some really neat stuff with this decision.
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.
So will not allowing background processes kill potentially cool apps?
- Thread starter Amblinman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I rather have a fast phone than one getting clogged up with a bunch of unnecessary apps.
these issues should be dealt with once the push service goes up this fall (or whenever it is).
Yes, but it will also kill a lot of crappy apps which would waste battery power and CPU cycles even when the user is trying to do something else more important. The average user would blame Apple instead of themselves for installing the stupid things.
Time will tell. I can see where Apple's model will work for most things and is especially nice in that it forces heavy processing to the server, but things like streaming radio and like will suffer. It's easy to dismiss it with statements like "I'd rather have a fast phone" but that's a needless and inaccurate generalization. There are apps that do very little and still manage to suck up cpu and memory and there are apps that do quite a bit, such as Slingplayer and, for what they do, are very reasonable with cpu time and memory.
My guess, and that's all it is, is that true background execution will be doable but on a case by case basis as determined by Apple. If there's a killer app that Apple could use to promote and sell the phone, I can't imagine that they'd say "no, we don't do that". Just like their prohibiting streaming data...unless it's convenient for them.
My guess, and that's all it is, is that true background execution will be doable but on a case by case basis as determined by Apple. If there's a killer app that Apple could use to promote and sell the phone, I can't imagine that they'd say "no, we don't do that". Just like their prohibiting streaming data...unless it's convenient for them.
Steve Jobs said that developers will be allowed to have Apps running in the background come this september. I doubt that to be honest, it'll probably get pushed back until october or some later date.
Mad Mac Maniac
macrumors 601
I agree. I think we should choose if we allow it to run in the background when we open it (much like detecting ur location). So if you want it to clog up ur phone then go for it, if you don't need it constantly running you can say no.
And also maybe apple can further regulate and decide which ones are allowed to do it. this would prevent really crappy, sluggish programs from clogging it up for no reason..
the aim one would definitely be kool
And also maybe apple can further regulate and decide which ones are allowed to do it. this would prevent really crappy, sluggish programs from clogging it up for no reason..
the aim one would definitely be kool
The 2.0 software is making this alot slower than it used to be. If you allow background apps. You won't get anything working.
Think.
I haven't looked yet. Are there no local system alarms that can wake up an application at a certain time?
Or is everything supposed to work off server notifications? (Which also assumes that the app writer has set up a server to talk to Apple... overkill for most apps.)
If there are no local process alarms, then if you had an app to notifiy you when it's time to take a pill on a changing schedule... and you were somewhere (say a plane) without data connection... it wouldn't work.
Or is everything supposed to work off server notifications? (Which also assumes that the app writer has set up a server to talk to Apple... overkill for most apps.)
If there are no local process alarms, then if you had an app to notifiy you when it's time to take a pill on a changing schedule... and you were somewhere (say a plane) without data connection... it wouldn't work.
newyorksole: Where did you read that?
michael31986: http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/09/iphone-push-notification-service-for-devs-announced/
The push notification service will fix only a (very) small part of this problem. It's completely useless for VoIP or radio applications and it forces a complete paradigm shift for things like IM applications. Normally an IM client runs on the client device (the iPhone in this case), if you want it to be able to use the PNS the part of the IM client that maintains the connections needs to run on some remote server which has some pretty severe privacy implications.
BTW there still seems to be close to no information about the PNS, only some news articles that are based on the WWDC keynote. Can't find anything in ADC?
IMO it shouldn't be too hard to limit background apps to only a (very?) small amount of CPU time and only allow this when needed. Games for example can just save their state when another app comes to the foreground. Apps that need to maintain network connections or that need to use the audio system should be able to stay in the background if they play nice.
michael31986: http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/09/iphone-push-notification-service-for-devs-announced/
The push notification service will fix only a (very) small part of this problem. It's completely useless for VoIP or radio applications and it forces a complete paradigm shift for things like IM applications. Normally an IM client runs on the client device (the iPhone in this case), if you want it to be able to use the PNS the part of the IM client that maintains the connections needs to run on some remote server which has some pretty severe privacy implications.
BTW there still seems to be close to no information about the PNS, only some news articles that are based on the WWDC keynote. Can't find anything in ADC?
IMO it shouldn't be too hard to limit background apps to only a (very?) small amount of CPU time and only allow this when needed. Games for example can just save their state when another app comes to the foreground. Apps that need to maintain network connections or that need to use the audio system should be able to stay in the background if they play nice.
modern operating systems should really take care of those kind of problems and the user should not be bothered at all. if iphone os can't handle it, users will experience problems with "crappy apps" regardless... as a matter of fact, it seems that this is exactly the case now.
A nice write up about the PNS:
http://whydoeseverythingsuck.com/2008/06/iphone-background-processing-not-fixed.html
The thing that annoys me most is that it's currently impossible to create a decent SSH client (which is something that I absolutely need). I guess I'm going to end up jailbreaking my phone to work around these restrictions.
http://whydoeseverythingsuck.com/2008/06/iphone-background-processing-not-fixed.html
The thing that annoys me most is that it's currently impossible to create a decent SSH client (which is something that I absolutely need). I guess I'm going to end up jailbreaking my phone to work around these restrictions.
That is not a correct understanding of what will happen. 3rd party applications still will not be allowed to run in the background. 3rd party servers will be able to send notifications to the Apple cloud, which will then get pushed onto the phone and displayed. These notifications are just meant to inform the user that an app will have some new info for them the next time they run it.
Modern operating systems are also designed to run with gigabytes of RAM and large amounts of free hard drive space to page out memory to. An embedded device like the iPhone is still better off with limited/no background processes.