Some minimize to the system tray. Some close all open documents. Some only close one document. Prior to Office 2007, Word and Excel did not even behave the same way.
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.
When will we get background processes?
- Thread starter Blink7551
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some minimize to the system tray. Some close all open documents. Some only close one document. Prior to Office 2007, Word and Excel did not even behave the same way.
I guess I don't use LOTS of apps then. The only app I can think of that works like that is AIM, but it's a setting and I chose to have it work like that.
I hope Apple at some point does allow limited background processes for apps, but they'd better be smart about it. Right now I'm far happier with the iPhone and its many limitations as compared to the bloated disaster that is Windows Mobile. Background processes are one of the reasons WinMo has so much trouble.
Bottom line is that even the smartest phones are still pretty limited by the processor, memory bus speed, and most importantly battery life. Once micro fuel cells hit mainstream, they can start dropping dual cores in the iPhone along with 800mHz memory, and then we can start having lots of background processes without compromises.
Bottom line is that even the smartest phones are still pretty limited by the processor, memory bus speed, and most importantly battery life. Once micro fuel cells hit mainstream, they can start dropping dual cores in the iPhone along with 800mHz memory, and then we can start having lots of background processes without compromises.
Also, in Word for Windows (for example), if you select "close" from the menu with only one document open, it closes the document, but leaves the application open. If you click the "close" button it closes the document and application. Same command. One is a button. One is a menu item. But they do different things.
The menu item is in the context of the document, and the button on the window is in the context of the program. Very simple concept.
A dozen?? Okay, maybe you're lucky not to have battery problems...but a dozen?? Any new app you open up will crash on sight. And we all know how annoying that is.
Timer applications will be horrendously off.
Performance will be killed.
It's push, which is significantly different than background processes. Push is more like a background one-way connection.
It's very different, because the most popular (arguably) entertainment applications can't be used: the radios.
And of course stuff like iTrail cannot be used either.
There is no differentiation in UI between document and program. And even assuming that you are correct, then you are saying that the close button should close the program. But it only does that is there is only one document open.
Look at Office 2003. In Word, if you have multiple documents open and you click the close button, it closes one document. In Excel, in the same situation, it closes all of the documents.
I'm not saying it's hard to understand, it is just inconsistent.
Why? It's outdated, and the inconsistency you're complaining about has been fixed in the current version. Get over it.
Everyone is confusing background services with multiple applications running at the same time - they are NOT the same thing.
A background process is what runs in the background even after you have explicitly terminated an application. You tell the application to close, and it responds, "Actually, I have important things to do, so I am going to keep running anyways and you can just think you've closed me." What makes Windows so bad is it allows any application to run them. Applications can also set themselves to automatically run at startup. Windows solution to allow the user "control" them is the Task manager. It's a joke. Just open it up and compare the applications tab with the processes tab.
I think what everyone here is really looking for is being able to consciously run multiple applications. The iPhone already does this with the phone and iPod apps. When you return to the home screen, your call doesn't get dropped or your music continues to play. This allows you to Think of any issue you have with not having "background processes" and you will realize it's simply the lack of being able to run multiple third party apps at once.
The problem is that the home button both closes third party apps and is required to get to the home screen to run another app. Although elegant, Apple has shot itself in the foot with the one-button design. This issue would simply evaporate if the button functionality was separated into "return to home screen" and "return to home screen and close current app" buttons.
A background process is what runs in the background even after you have explicitly terminated an application. You tell the application to close, and it responds, "Actually, I have important things to do, so I am going to keep running anyways and you can just think you've closed me." What makes Windows so bad is it allows any application to run them. Applications can also set themselves to automatically run at startup. Windows solution to allow the user "control" them is the Task manager. It's a joke. Just open it up and compare the applications tab with the processes tab.
I think what everyone here is really looking for is being able to consciously run multiple applications. The iPhone already does this with the phone and iPod apps. When you return to the home screen, your call doesn't get dropped or your music continues to play. This allows you to Think of any issue you have with not having "background processes" and you will realize it's simply the lack of being able to run multiple third party apps at once.
The problem is that the home button both closes third party apps and is required to get to the home screen to run another app. Although elegant, Apple has shot itself in the foot with the one-button design. This issue would simply evaporate if the button functionality was separated into "return to home screen" and "return to home screen and close current app" buttons.
It would be really nice to listen to Pandora or AOL radio while doing other things on the iPhone, instead of having to stop the music to compose an email. This wouldn't be so bad if the iPod app had the radio feature like it does on the computer, but I don't see Apple adding that to the iPhone, although it'd be nice.
I too would like to listen to aol radio while doing something else, such as surfing the web. This should be optional for those that want it and those that don't. This phone does so many great things but can't do the litttle basic things. It's retarded to have to open aol messanger to check your messages. A good android phone cant come soon enough.
no he's not. his point, which is valid, is that OS X seeks to place limits on what can run in the background while Windows does not.
on topic, i think there would be just as many complaint about apps in the background if they were allowed as there are now. everyone would be crying about how their batteries last an hour and why does Apple allow this to happen!
someone earlier mentioned Inteliscreen. it's a great app, but it straight kills your battery. if you have that going, plus SSH, Push, WiFi, Location, etc. plus any other background apps, your iPhone would seriously last about 30 minutes.
finding the right mix of features is a balancing act, and while not perfect, Apple has done a pretty damn good job making the device feature-rich with fast performance and a decent battery (at least comparable to other 3G smartphones' batteries). due to the nature of the device, some features just didn't make the cut. despite it's shortcomings, i think its still the best smartphone, hell, cellphone, on the market.
the iPhone is never going to please all of the people all of the time, nothing ever does, but it definitely pleases most of it's users damn near all of the time.
So how do some of the more major applications run then? I'd hate if every time I closed a photoshop document, Photoshop itself quit, and I had to reopen it. Or Vectorworks...sheesh, waiting for that to load every time... Obviously, I don't have enough time on Windows to know howthe apps like that run. Does the app run in a whole window, with the toolbars and everything within that window? If so (I remember some apps like that), I hate that, and would never want it that way. To each their own, though.
ya and its SUPER hard to look down in the system tray and see if they are still running LOL
The attached image shows how Photoshop handles it. If the document is maximized, there is another set of buttons in the corner. If the document is not maximized, it has it's own set of buttons. Either way, only the buttons in the Photoshop window frame affect the whole program. The buttons for each document only affect the document.
Attachments
Not sure what you think I need to understand. I understand quite well how this all works. I know what Command-Q is
.Example: Preview. If I hit the red close box, it should quit Preview....it does not. WHY do I want preview on my dock? I don't. Apple should include an option for me to determine how it behaves on the dock. I can appreciate the fact that there are people out there that want Preview on their dock at all times, but a lot of us don't.
Windows is better, but not perfect. Most apps will close once the red X is hit, but some don't.
this is not true. i use inteliscreen, i have push, 3g, wifi, bluetooth, and gps all turned on. and with moderate use, no music or video, but plenty of app / txt use, i get over 16 hours.
i agree with most of what your saying, and things like aim or itrail would do great as just being able to run simultaniously. probably 99 percent of what we want to do would be solved by that. but there are things were a background process would work better. for instance intelliscreen. or, as an alternative, the ability to catch an incomming message / phone call, and use a 3rd party app instead of the standard apps. being able to modify core functionality instead of relying on how apple wants you to use the product.
in the end, i think this policy is half about battery life and half about hardware limitations they dont want to advertise. the iphone slows down on some apps already, it would not do well with more open. but they dont want people to know that's the reason.
they wont change any of this until a new beefier version of the hardware comes out, and / or android blows them away in features, which i hope they will with their more open platform. apple is good at inovative new products but has a history of stagnation until competition forces them to innovate again. but only time will tell.
It was one example. And Office 2003 is still in use on a large percentage of Windows computers.
I think that makes my point. My point was not that it is hard to figure Windows out, it is that it is inconsistent. Nothing for me to get over at all.
I would love to be able to listen to music using Pandora while browsing the web with Safari. I've been able to do this with every other smartphone I've ever had. But I guess Steve Jobs knows better then myself how I should use my iPhone .
.Windows has nothing to do with how Photoshop works. Adobe was the one who made Photoshop work that way, not Microsoft.My point was not that it is hard to figure Windows out, it is that it is inconsistent. Nothing for me to get over at all.
Of course it does. Adobe has to use the APIs that Microsoft has made available in Windows.Again, Photoshop was one example of how different Windows applications react differently to clicking on the close button. You started by saying "If I click the X on an application window, the application closes. Every time." This is clearly untrue. Do you at least see that?