Related
I'm opening a new thread so people don't have to dig thru other threads to find this.
Leaked documents show that Windows Phone 7 will indeed have multitasking after approval by Microsoft. Appearently you will need to ask Microsoft for special permission, and as such you will need to prove your need for multitasking. I'm sure it will be limited to apps such as Pandora that show a specific need for running in the background.
http://www.wmexperts.com/leak-windows-phone-7-documents-developers
Thanks for posting this. It looks like I need to start learning silverlight which I expected would be the case.
The multitasking is annoying. I dont want to have to ask for permission to enable this. Do they plan on controlling this through the app store? If its just some hidden API's they would get leaked in minutes and everyone could use them.
Weird interpretation
From the leaked documents provided, I cannot figure out how did they come to the conclusion that developers would need to ask for permission to do multitasking. It seems that the authors of the article are not really technical and had things mixed up. OEMs and MOs will have to request access to some native APIs if Managed API and provided limited native API set is not enough for their needs, which is something totally different from processes and threads. Processes and threads, or in layman terms multitasking is business as usual. I don't see any restrictions there.
Of course the OS can multitask. That's never been a question.
The question is whether third party applications will be allowed to run in the background.
There is no word on whether this is the case, and in fact, every official statement from Microsoft currently hints to this not being the case. It seems like they're going the Apple way of not allowing third party applications to run in the background.
Did anybody read the document? There's no connection between multitasking and approval. It's not going to be done with hidden APIs that can get leaked. It's not completely clear but here's what it seems to say to me:
Anyone can write C#/Silverlight apps that use the .NET Compact Framework and install them. Hopefully this will let you do most things you want to do. The big problem would be if .NET CF 4 is missing any of the "normal" useful stuff. Personally, if I can interact with calls, texts, contacts, location services (e.g. GPS) and the internet then I'm happy.
If you want to write unmanaged (i.e. C++) code or call some extra managed APIs you'll need to get the code signed. This will probably go through a similar process to Apple's app store. This should only be required for low level stuff - drivers, etc. The wording of the doc suggests that it would only be phone carriers that are likely to be using this.
Multitasking isn't mentioned, so it's only guesswork between now and MIX10.
freyberry said:
Of course the OS can multitask. That's never been a question.
The question is whether third party applications will be allowed to run in the background.
There is no word on whether this is the case, and in fact, every official statement from Microsoft currently hints to this not being the case. It seems like they're going the Apple way of not allowing third party applications to run in the background.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it may work more like the way Android does than the way iPhone does. Android multitasks properly, but suspends non-foreground processes. Looking at the built in calendar demo, it pops in and pops out to the same place, so it's not being restarted, merely resumed.
l3v5y said:
I think it may work more like the way Android does than the way iPhone does. Android multitasks properly, but suspends non-foreground processes. Looking at the built in calendar demo, it pops in and pops out to the same place, so it's not being restarted, merely resumed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not how multitasking on Android works. Android applications save their state when they are sent to the background, but they continue to run. They are not suspended, unless the system runs out of RAM.
If the system runs out of RAM, then the "oldest" process that's running in the background gets killed. Since it saved its state when it was sent to the background, you can reopen it and continue where you left off.
That's exactly how multitasking *should* work.
freyberry said:
That's exactly how multitasking *should* work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? Isn't it the same as stated by MS that apps will be "paused" in background? Also, how is it going to help my satnav app be at the right position when I minimize the dialer in a call?
vangrieg said:
Really? Isn't it the same as stated by MS that apps will be "paused" in background? Also, how is it going to help my satnav app be at the right position when I minimize the dialer in a call?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it is not at all the same. Read my post again.
guys take a look at this.. this guy is playing music while navigating trough the phone..
http://www.wmexperts.com/wme-mwc-video-hands-no-2-windows-phone-7-series?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+wmexperts+(WMExperts)&utm_content=Twitter
may i ask for this thread to list facts only?
i would love this thread not to be dragged into the debate of hints and speculations. I would say, as long as we don't have something solid let's keep the speculations at the other thread.
i have seen some videos where by mistake shows multi tasking cappabilites, and i believe as long as the cappability is there (even if locked down) we can find a way around it. but we are still in the dark, maybe Microsoft will simply say that hey developers, yes we have full multitasking but not for .net cf apps, only unmanaged code can? maybe! just to ensure that not anyone can write an app to stay in the background.
Mostly the usage of multitasking is not that high, i don't keep much apps in memory. infact alot of the users of Windows Mobile (5, 6.x.x) do set their phones to close the app on X click. and most of us (including me) didn't want to run multiple apps in the background, actually that's why HTC built the Taskmanager into their ROMS. even SonyEricsson.
Of course there are exceptions for that, i would love for my Navigation app to stay in the background while my friend is playing on the phone.
the main point is we don't have any clue yet, if we get any info that is official/confirmed leak then we can get either UPSET or releafed
take it easy mates.
young blade said:
guys take a look at this.. this guy is playing music while navigating trough the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Music (Zune) is not a 3rd party app.
pilgrim011 said:
Music (Zune) is not a 3rd party app.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
okay so its about 3th party apps in running in the background.
I'm sure it will be possible.. whats the point of not doing it and having 500+ ram in the device..
thats like tuning a car up to 999 of horse power and restricting it down to 300.
young blade said:
okay so its about 3th party apps in running in the background.
I'm sure it will be possible.. whats the point of not doing it and having 500+ ram in the device..
thats like tuning a car up to 999 of horse power and restricting it down to 300.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't be so sure. Unfortunately, Microsoft is heading Apple's path, the dark side...
Honestly if they make is so you have to actually program it to run the background instead of natively making everything work in the background, I beleive that would be a good thing. I have to pull the task manager up to close every app after I open it because I don't really need it in the background. For example when I use a calculator to compute something why does it need to stay up after I'm done with the calculation?
On the otherhand, If they are making it so you have to get direct permission from Microsoft and not just from the OS to run in the background that probably means they want some more money or something outta the deal and I don't think thats the best way to go. Phone these days usually have a good amount of ram to be able to run task in the background and they shouldn't underpower the device if it can handle it.
I don't think that iPhone is the way to the dark side.... they are able to make "dumb users" (I don't think you are dumb, it's a way to put it into), a way to make what they want with their device. As a higher user, you know how to manage properly a system unmanaged because you know to play properly with the system, resources, and more over, but some people just has problems knowing how to open a file...
Really, the iPhone way is bring the IT technologies to people that not usually knows or likes the IT, and use them because they must, or they like the services but not the tech itself.
I belive that maybe WP7S has become so iPhone, and we may want to drop it, but really, the human history has ever been the same. It's not about how good or how many features has a device/technology/thing, it's about how many people use it in daily life. Try to think about a space travel agency, the people will believe in space travels once people become able to go to the moon by themselves, not because the NASA did it. And no matter that NASA was able to take a "car" for the astronauts and an space agency only can bring you an your package, it just doesn't matter.
Yes, it will indeed multitask for the native apps at least. In the presentation, Joe goes to a maps app, then goes right back to the calendar app where he was. Looks like the iPhone push stuff.
Kloc said:
Honestly if they make is so you have to actually program it to run the background instead of natively making everything work in the background, I beleive that would be a good thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be the best thing they could do. That's how it *should* work.
yes, not all apps require to be able to run in the background. things like calculator for example, i hate killing it using task manager.
things like sending sms or email, when I hit the send button and close the gui, the msg should be sent to the background service and really close remove the gui interface from the memory. i hate killing tmail.exe.
and there are a lot more examples why current winmo multitasking is not right. tweaks required just to be able to completely close app like htc album, opera, etc.
i am glad that finally microsoft will address this seriously. i am not surprise that ability to run in the background will be controlled by them. it is still better being controlled rather than not allowed at all (like Apple iPhone?).
freyberry said:
That would be the best thing they could do. That's how it *should* work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Careful, careful....!!
You don't know HOW they're going to adress the issue. If they completely forbid multitasking, like Apple, then things will get a LOT WORSE than they are now.
I agree that not every application has to run in the background. But some MUST run in the background and it would be a huge failure if they didn't allow third party developers to use multitasking at all, like Apple.
Multitasking for each and every application, like on WM6.5, is still a lot better than no multitasking at all!!
I read more information about WP7 and the concept of Hub. I estimate the HUB is a new type of multitasking. The concept is OS will push the application to back group and freeze the UI, and the information for application will push to HUB, so user can catch the information from HUB. For example, while user using the TomTom,when you need return to Home,OS would push the TomTom to backgroup,and freeze the TomTom's UI ,music...,but user still can see the inf. from HUB eg, speed,direction)
Do you agree ?
Anyway , I love the concept of WP7 and HUB
Great thing about this hub. I think all these cries about no multitasking is stupid thing, because of not understanding the idea of hub...
iamcrazyfire said:
I read more information about WP7 and the concept of Hub. I estimate the HUB is a new type of multitasking. The concept is OS will push the application to back group and freeze the UI, and the information for application will push to HUB, so user can catch the information from HUB. For example, while user using the TomTom,when you need return to Home,OS would push the TomTom to backgroup,and freeze the TomTom's UI ,music...,but user still can see the inf. from HUB eg, speed,direction)
Do you agree ?
Anyway , I love the concept of WP7 and HUB
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup...same as iphone.
In iphone you decide which application gets prime attention. The "one" button is the task killer. The apps on the pages is akin to the apps listed on a task manager. You pick which one you want to switch to. The others tasks are frozen.
Don't iPhone tasks actually end meaning their state is lost?
RustyGrom said:
Don't iPhone tasks actually end meaning their state is lost?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really....they are frozen (hibernate).
U start right back from where u left off.
Can't say that about games though.
chiks19018 said:
Yup...same as iphone.
In iphone you decide which application gets prime attention. The "one" button is the task killer. The apps on the pages is akin to the apps listed on a task manager. You pick which one you want to switch to. The others tasks are frozen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But iphone freeze whole application, the concept of mine is wp7 only freeze the UI and sound,wps7 stills allow application push the information to hub.If wps only run managed code is true ,this type of multitasking(multithreading) will not cash the whole OS cause of one of shiit
iamcrazyfire said:
But iphone freeze whole application, the concept of mine is wp7 only freeze the UI and sound,wps7 stills allow application push the information to hub.If wps only run managed code is true ,this type of multitasking(multithreading) will not cash the whole OS cause of one of shiit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah...when iphone comes with 1.5ghz dual core processor, it will allow that too.
Multitasking requires that processing continues while the app doesn't have focus. What's being described above is simply suspending the app...not multitasking.
A good use of multitasking for example is: running a navigation app such as CoPilot 8, downloading a file with IE and talking on the phone all simultaneously. Ideally, you wouldn't want any of those apps to stop or suspend, you'd want them to continue running even though another app still has focus.
I don't know how a non-true-multitasking OS would handle doing what I just described. Even if it employed a sophisticated system of notifications and interrupts, I don't see how. I hope MS has a good work-around developed for WP7. My daily use of multitasking includes the use of MagiCall call manager app which always runs in the background filtering my SMS's and phone calls. iPhone doesn't have an app like that because it doesn't truly multitask.
Running a navigation software and then taking a phone call ... I have done this a lot and it is a good use-case.
And I dont think the new WP7 cannot do this. It is a phone device, taking a phone call should be the highest priority.
This would suck if the navigation software is then paused, I hope not. How is this on the iPhone?
But, running a navigation software ... while downloading a file ... and then taking a phone call?
You must be more specific, because I cannot imagine myself, on a running car using CoPilot and still managing my torrents That's dangerous ...
WhyBe said:
Multitasking requires that processing continues while the app doesn't have focus. What's being described above is simply suspending the app...not multitasking.
A good use of multitasking for example is: running a navigation app such as CoPilot 8, downloading a file with IE and talking on the phone all simultaneously. Ideally, you wouldn't want any of those apps to stop or suspend, you'd want them to continue running even though another app still has focus.
I don't know how a non-true-multitasking OS would handle doing what I just described. Even if it employed a sophisticated system of notifications and interrupts, I don't see how. I hope MS has a good work-around developed for WP7. My daily use of multitasking includes the use of MagiCall call manager app which always runs in the background filtering my SMS's and phone calls. iPhone doesn't have an app like that because it doesn't truly multitask.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well those were just random examples to illustrate the type of apps that you DON'T want to suspend when they don't have focus.
WhyBe said:
well those were just random examples to illustrate the type of apps that you DON'T want to suspend when they don't have focus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how important is downloading the file in the whole scheme of things?
Not very much. It might benefit to stop that process and use the available power to work what you can actually see.
I think its pointless to rationalize away the need to multitask. Hopefully, MS has worked out a reasonable compromise in WP7 until it's feasible to have true multitasking AND seamless performance in a mobile form factor.
I use a call manager (MagiCall) which runs in the background. I know they don't have this type of app for non-jailbroken iPhones because it doesn't multitask.
My typical multitasking is CoPilot, MagiCall and MS Voice Command reading my text messages. This is not an unrealistic expectation. I'm hoping WP7 will have some sort of scheme to allow the same functionality.
why would you need MSVC reading text messages when the Copilot is giving out instructions?doesn't make sense.
Here is what makes sense:
Only 1 voice/sound application can be actively running at any given time. Cannot have the games music, music player, MSVC, Copilot all talking/playing at the same time.
Can have only 1 graphic application running at 1 time. I.e. Panel refresh possible only for the foregorund application.
Multiple task possible for data-fetch/push application.
Anything more is unreasonable.
chiks19018 said:
why would you need MSVC reading text messages when the Copilot is giving out instructions?doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems kind of obvious to me...IDK. If I am driving, it is very convenient for everything to be audible as opposed to visual. So voiced text messages are better when driving as well as voiced navigation instructions. What would be kick ass is if I could get some speech-to-text to reply to my messages vocally.
Call/SMS firewalling is enough reason for me to desire multitasking in a phone. Perhaps these could be implemented using some sort of interupt system in WP7.
I must be nuts even reading such needs & requirements
you think i'll be able to log onto an IM client and then surf the net and await for messages? or do i have to turn on some type of forward to text feature? that's probably my biggest concern. everything elsle, i could probably live w/ teh "suspend."
though if i was downloading a song or movie or smething, i'd hate to have to wait for it to finish before i can do something else...
chiks19018 said:
how important is downloading the file in the whole scheme of things?
Not very much. It might benefit to stop that process and use the available power to work what you can actually see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would it be a benefit to stop a file downloading in the background?
If you're downloading a large file, you don't want to sit staring at your phone's screen waiting until it finishes downloading before you can do anything else.
If you're so primitive that you can't find something for your phone to do while you're doing something else on it, I don't know why you bother having a smartphone.
Well, have you ever downloaded a large file to your phone?
Probably ...
But me? No, never ...
Why?
Because if I am at home, I will use my desktop PC to download which so much faster than my mobile phone. Think, the download speed is not only related to the internet connection.
Then I will pull my SDHC card, copy the file from the desktop.
Super fast, painless.
You can argue "What if you are not at home?"
I will not download that large file ... what kind of large file I must download while on the go to put in my mobile phone? Movie? How long before the battery runs out? Better to do something else
elyl said:
Why would it be a benefit to stop a file downloading in the background?
If you're downloading a large file, you don't want to sit staring at your phone's screen waiting until it finishes downloading before you can do anything else.
If you're so primitive that you can't find something for your phone to do while you're doing something else on it, I don't know why you bother having a smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
elyl said:
Why would it be a benefit to stop a file downloading in the background?
If you're downloading a large file, you don't want to sit staring at your phone's screen waiting until it finishes downloading before you can do anything else.
If you're so primitive that you can't find something for your phone to do while you're doing something else on it, I don't know why you bother having a smartphone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry. I got that wrong. File downloads/datapush/fetch can and should continue in the background. nothing wrong with that. Just never give those processes top priority is what I really meant. Push comes to shove, those processes should be suspended for the benefit of the process on the screen.
Please, please for the love of god write a post, and sticky it, about what multitasking and background scheduling is, and why most apps shouldn't be allowed to run in the background. I'm so sick of reading about users complaining about "the lack of multitasking" (Eeeeew! Now I said it, and I feel dirty! :S ) when what they really want is the ability to run annoying programs in the background that will allow them to complain about the poor battery life, how WP7 raped them economically etc etc...because they really don't know what they want.
Please? Pretty please with sugar on top?
tiwas said:
I'm so sick of reading about users complaining about "the lack of multitasking" ... when what they really want is the ability to run annoying programs in the background that will allow them to complain about the poor battery life, how WP7 raped them economically etc etc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most users?!
Most people want the ablility to continue being navigated to their destination while listening to streaming music (not thru Zune as their region does not allow it - like yours) or check their email or even make a phone-call to say they'll be late.
Or perhaps they want an Exchange task manager that will actually remind you of your tasks without having to keep the app open at all times, or maybe they would like their phone to automatically change "profiles" at certain times of the day (ie., very simplified; 8-12 ringer on, 12-13 on silent except certain numbers, 13-18 all on, 18-23 same as lunch, 23-8 all silent apart from alarms).
These are all, relatively common, things you cannot do without real multitasking.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE! stop calling that multi-tasking! It's background scheduling!
And, yeah, I see your point, but apps like that should have special authorization to ensure they're not spinning in the background stealing processor cycles, downloading data, draining the battery etc...
tiwas said:
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE! stop calling that multi-tasking! It's background scheduling!
And, yeah, I see your point, but apps like that should have special authorization to ensure they're not spinning in the background stealing processor cycles, downloading data, draining the battery etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, no. The examples I gave were a mixture of actual multitasking and scheduling. Some could do with a simple "register this event for execution at this time" but others really do need the full app running in the background at "all" times.
I definitely agree though, not every Tom **** and Harry should be allowed to write fully multitasking apps - or rather, they should be allowed to, but their release in the marketplace should be limited to those certified by Microsoft. I.e., what I'm saying is that the OS should have been fully prepared for multitasking from the getgo, with developers having to use technical exceptions during app certification to be published. As is, I very much doubt we'll see multitasking until the first major update which will likely come hand in hand with much higher HW specs to make sure the OS is still silky smooth.
Running the app in the background at all times is still background scheduling...Multitasking is, in all fairness, what the OS uses to run threads in the background, but multitasking is fully supported by the OS. It's the lack of subscribing to background scheduling events that's causing "the problems".
At least we agree about letting everybody schedule whatever they feel like is a bad idea, and hopefully, at some point, MS will let developers use "advanced functions" that require "advanced testing" before letting them into marketplace. All the bits and pieces seem to be there, though, as OEMs can make background apps...
WP7 cannot multi-task at all, and attempting to infer that it does with garbage semantics is pretty lame.
How about the mods sticky a thread on users who don't know what they're talking about attempting to force their own lexicon on the rest of us and attempting to appear so intelligent and above us unintelligent sheep.
Thank you for showing us the light....
What some of us actually want out of WP7 is an actual ability to run more than one freaking application at once. Does that spell it out for you?
If I am using a 3rd party podcast app because the zune one sucks, I want to be able to then check my damn email without my podcast cutting out. If I am playing a game and I get a text, I want to be able to respond without having to reload the entire game.
Call this whatever the hell you want to call it, but WP7 cannot do it, Android and iOS can.
Get off your high horse and help development instead of attempting to condescend on the rest of us.
lol what a stupid post. It's 2011 and we can't have the ability for multiple applications to run at once? what is this world coming to.. and asking for a sticky because you *THINK* multitasking = slow apps? I got news for you, it's a discussion forum, if you don't like it don't read the thread.
orangekid said:
WP7 cannot multi-task at all, and attempting to infer that it does with garbage semantics is pretty lame.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh...want me to tell my programs to stop running more than one thread, then?
And what are you calling "bull**** semantics"?
1. The OS can multitask, and it allows special applications to run in the background (scheduling). Proof: you can listen to music while surfing the web, and accept calls while checking the calendar. Of COURSE it can multitask!
2. Programs can multitask. I can asynchronously call a web service and do stuff while I wait. I can also display a wait animation while processing stuff
So please try to keep your mouth closed when you have no idea what you're talking about.
Besides Microsoft stuff there is absolutely no multitasking. Is that better?
tiwas said:
Oh...want me to tell my programs to stop running more than one thread, then?
And what are you calling "bull**** semantics"?
1. The OS can multitask, and it allows special applications to run in the background (scheduling). Proof: you can listen to music while surfing the web, and accept calls while checking the calendar. Of COURSE it can multitask!
2. Programs can multitask. I can asynchronously call a web service and do stuff while I wait. I can also display a wait animation while processing stuff
So please try to keep your mouth closed when you have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
once again you prove that you have no idea what you're talking about. Being able to launch a couple of crappy MS apps and then open IE is not multi-tasking in any practical form. What you reference is about the only time it can background anything.
What if I want to use a non-MS app that does not suck and do anything else? Not going to happen. This is a real issue. I cannot use any other music player or podcast player or music streaming app and open IE or text or email or anything, I cannot text or email while playing a game if I don't want the game to reload.
Claiming that WP7 can multi-task is like saying it has a comparable app store to iOS, it's complete garbage.
vetvito said:
Besides Microsoft stuff there is absolutely no multitasking. Is that better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol, beat me to it, and more concise
Yes, it actually IS! Now we don't have all the problems from WM6.5, which is proof that even professional developers have problems setting up their programs correctly.
And still - it's called scheduling.
Multi-tasking (which even an old 8086 can do): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_multitasking
Multi-threading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multithreading_(computer_architecture)
Scheduling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduling_(computing)
Now PLEASE read and understand...
orangekid said:
once again you prove that you have no idea what you're talking about. Being able to launch a couple of crappy MS apps and then open IE is not multi-tasking in any practical form. What you reference is about the only time it can background anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
FFS! You're just proving you have no reading comprehension. I'm talking about threads in a program, not tombstoning an app.
orangekid said:
What if I want to use a non-MS app that does not suck and do anything else? Not going to happen. This is a real issue. I cannot use any other music player or podcast player or music streaming app and open IE or text or email or anything, I cannot text or email while playing a game if I don't want the game to reload.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you think that? We're on a beta OS, and MS is still ironing things out. The OS *can* multitask, they're just not exposing it to 3rd party developers (yet), which I think is an excellent idea.
orangekid said:
Claiming that WP7 can multi-task is like saying it has a comparable app store to iOS, it's complete garbage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For crying out loud. Now you're literally comparing apples to oranges, and you're not even able to see in how many ways the comparison fails.
Go read up on the links I posted, then TRY to control your adhd while reading my initial post. Then I *might* consider your postings anything but a complete waste of perfectly good bits...
wrong again, my friend.
If the OS "can" multi-task but only does it to the crapware that comes on the phone, then it essentially can't multi-task.
And the OS would have to be modified to to be able to actually multi-task and not just keep playing zune when you press the home key.
Once again you're trying to play the semantics game bill clinton...
when people here say they want multi-tasking, they are talking about apps that actually matter, third freaking party apps, and the OS cannot do it, this is a problem to a lot of users.
I don't care if the OS is in beta stage, are you saying we should wait 5 years to buy a WP7 phone?
This is quality - good we can have a constructive discussion! LOL.
For me the point is the phone doesn't do what I want it to, Android and the iPhone do appear to so if we can get Multi-schedule-task-switching like the other OS's in the next update I'll be happy.
Maybe those who can't help but get too excited by terminology could spend some time writing an app that replaces offending words to their preferred alternatives when viewing the forums?
orangekid said:
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Man, you're stupid. From what you're saying, I can call you an illiterate just because you choose not to read what people write. I can, like I just did, call you stupid because you choose not to think (at least I hope it's a choice).
It's there. MS can let anyone they chose access it. You're not on the list. More companies might get on it eventually, but until then it's special access. That does NOT mean the OS cannot multitask or schedule.
But...since you don't even know the difference between multitasking, multithreading, and scheduling and the effects they have in a program or a program launching other programs (like an OS) you really should just stay quiet. You might learn something...
gc48067 said:
This is quality - good we can have a constructive discussion! LOL.
For me the point is the phone doesn't do what I want it to, Android and the iPhone do appear to so if we can get Multi-schedule-task-switching like the other OS's in the next update I'll be happy.
Maybe those who can't help but get too excited by terminology could spend some time writing an app that replaces offending words to their preferred alternatives when viewing the forums?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I wasn't the one who grabbed the ball and ran with it Forrest Gump style. I wanted to get the facts about multitasking/scheduling out so people could start asking the right questions instead of asking questions that doesn't make sense because they're plain wrong.
I *do* see the point in getting scheduling, and I would love to have some hand picked scheduling programs myself. Most programs don't use it, but some do - like streaming. There should be a stringent verification process and it shouldn't be available to everyone.
Like Mr Moron pointed out, he wanted his apps to tombstone correctly so he could continue from where he left off (sorry, orangekid, but you *are* stupid). That is a clear example of when NOT to run a program in the background. He's angry at MS because the game developers doesn't tombstone correctly so he can continue from where he left off. That's the *exact* reason why I don't want everybody to have access to background scheduling, as people would start yelling at MS for all the crashes and Samsung for making phones with crappy battery life - even though the fault is somewhere else.
Regarding the app you're talking about, you want me to use regular expressions to transform sentences like "orangekid, you're an f-ing ass-O" to "orangekid, you're an f-ing donkey-hole"? (sorry...couldn't help myself )
gc48067 said:
This is quality - good we can have a constructive discussion! LOL.
For me the point is the phone doesn't do what I want it to, Android and the iPhone do appear to so if we can get Multi-schedule-task-switching like the other OS's in the next update I'll be happy.
Maybe those who can't help but get too excited by terminology could spend some time writing an app that replaces offending words to their preferred alternatives when viewing the forums?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good points.
@tiwas, your original point is for people not to think that WP7 cannot mulit-task because it can run only Zune in the background. You then attempt to refine and back up your point by claiming multi-threading and scheduling and all this garbage, when it has been pointed out that when people in this forum say they want multi-tasking, they basically want to run an app other than Zune and continue the app running while doing other things, which WP7 cannot do, yet iOS and Android can.
Throw all the terminology you want into the mix and the above still holds true.
Your "urgent request" will not be considered by any mods because they have not been smoking crack today as far as I know.
tiwas said:
Regarding the app you're talking about, you want me to use regular expressions to transform sentences like "orangekid, you're an f-ing ass-O" to "orangekid, you're an f-ing donkey-hole"? (sorry...couldn't help myself )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
paragon of eloquence. simply amazing.
orangekid said:
Good points.
@tiwas, your original point is for people not to think that WP7 cannot mulit-task because it can run only Zune in the background. You then attempt to refine and back up your point by claiming multi-threading and scheduling and all this garbage, when it has been pointed out that when people in this forum say they want multi-tasking, they basically want to run an app other than Zune and continue the app running while doing other things, which WP7 cannot do, yet iOS and Android can.
Throw all the terminology you want into the mix and the above still holds true.
Your "urgent request" will not be considered by any mods because they have not been smoking crack today as far as I know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're a moron. Even more, you're a moron who cannot read.
tiwas said:
You're a moron. Even more, you're a moron who cannot read.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
when one cannot reason with logic they can be counted upon to resort to imbecilic and puerile insults.
Furthermore, my moronism and illiteracy are the byproducts of having to read posts such as the one quoted above which studies have shown reduce the general intelligence quotient of forum readers by an estimated 20%.
This is a clarification thread, and I will not, unlike my other attempt, be fooled into a pissing contest. There just seems to be a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to "multitasking" on Windows Phone 7, and I will try to clarify a little bit.
Problem: You're in a program, start another one, and then start the original again - and your data is gone, or if it's a game you have to start from the beginning.
Answer: This has nothing to do with multitasking, but something called tombstoning. The developers has to take into account what to do when a program is exited by starting another program, and most seem to just ignore it. That is when you lose your data or have to start the game from scratch
Problem: "Windows Phone doesn't multitask", "When will we get multitasking" etc
Answer: Windows Phone can multitask just fine. So can the programs running on Windows Phone. What most people refer to when asking these questions is really either the question above, or if developers will be allowed to run programs in the background. Multitasking is being able to more than one thing at the time, and the most simple test to see if your phone supports it or not is to see if you can receive phone calls or listen to music while you're checking mail. So - your phone can both multitask and run applications in the background (which is called scheduling, actually, as multitasking doesn't necessarily mean running a program that isn't in the foreground - uploading a picture to your sky drive while letting you browse the other pictures is typical multitasking).
Problem: "When will MS let us run programs in the background?"
Answer: There are both pros and cons to letting developers do this. A lot of developers aren't that good when it comes to using resources sensibly while in the background, and a lot of programs simply doesn't *need* to run in the background. If you're writing notes and want them back when you return, that's tombstoning. Playing a game? Well, you certainly don't want it to actually run in the background as you'll be dead when you return. Still tombstoning. One of the few applications is if you're listening to music (videos don't cound, because it doesn't make sense playing the video when you cannot watch it) or download larger amounts of data. The problem is that, if it's not done correctly, this can negatively impact performance (do you really want your game to stutter or have to wait two minutes for mail to open??), it can drain your battery, and it can even help distribute viruses. If MS wants to open this to developers, they need to have special testing procedures before they allow it. Also, misbehaving background apps will give most people a negative image of MS, which is apparent in all the threads dissing MS for not allowing "multitasking" because developers don't save data when exiting the application.
So, here's a short run-down of terms that are interesting in today's computer landscape:
* Multitasking: Being able to do more than one job at a time. Multitasking really just divides the processor time (available time to use the processor) and gives slices to different jobs.
* Multithreading: Being able to divide tasks into their own threads, thus allowing the use of more cores/processors. A multitasking, single threaded OS can only use one processor (simplification of the truth - if you know why it's a simplification, you don't need the full story. If you don't, it will only confuse you), while a multitasking, multithreaded OS can use more. Most programs, even for regular computers don't use multithreading, as it's a pain in the O to handle, but operating systems do. That's why, on a PC, Counter Strike will only use one of the cores on your brand new gaming rig with 8 cores, but all the cores will be active.
* Background scheduling: How the OS can let applications run in the background, usually by giving it less processor time (most often just free cycles) and thus letting it complete a time consuming process without making the system too slow to use. A foreground application will usually get more processor time than if it was running in the background.
I hope this clears it up, and helps people to understand what the different terms are and when to use it.
To sum up:
* Multitasking is available. There's no question about it. Windows Phone multitasks applications, and applications can multitask internally.
* Background scheduling is available, but is not an open API for developers. This has both positive and negative implications, depending on application
* A lot of developers are pretty bad when it comes to tombstoning.
Great post. There is nothing to be added. Sadly most ppl won't read the whole think or simply continue complaining.
I'm happy with the OS as it is, because I don't want all those crappy apps to suck my battery and fool with my CPU cycles.
In future real sceduling may be a capability of apps which need spezial certification. But I'm strictly against open APIs for that!
It has nothing to do with developers. If an OS is well written it will handle multitasking just fine, it's a nice excuse but a lame one. My old blackberry with a 400mhz processor and displays graphic icons can multi-task. Windows phone 7 with a 1ghz processor and is primarily text based won't allow it.
The keyword here is won't. We all know it's capable of doing it so why won't MS allow it? This is the reason why many major instant message apps are not available for this platform. What's the point of having an instant messager if it gets tombstoned when you switch screens? Big usability hole here.
the_Crispy said:
Great post. There is nothing to be added. Sadly most ppl won't read the whole think or simply continue complaining.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks
See the post below yours for confirmation that people won't read, but will gladly complain
I see what you mean and for the most part you got all the definitions correct, but you also have to see how WP7 handles apps and the pros and cons on the end-user.
WP7 actually just saves the state of the app when navigated away from, and does not actually enable you to RUN two apps at once so developers have to be really tricky with how they incorporate this into the OS. The pros are saving battery and not waste resources, the cons are that you cannot actually utilize the best parts of multi-tasking.
Do you want you game "running" in the background so you die? No, but the developer should know that and code the app appropriately. Do you want to be able to stream music in the background while checking emails or texting or tweeting? Of course. Not possible under the current version of WP7. How about playing a game/email/text while driving and having turn-by-turn navigation on? Nope. Developers might be lazy at times, but they're not usually idiots.
There's no question that the OS has the native ability to do so, no one ever argued that point. The beef is that MS has locked their OS down so they only allow Zune to do it. Well some of us don't like Zune or want to multi-task other apps too.
But MS wants to play it safe and see how multi-tasking is working out for Google and Apple before they actually allow it for any 3rd party apps, meanwhile the end-user suffers and the salesguy at the t-mobile store doesn't even show you an HD7 because you "can only do one thing at a time." MS needs to wake the hell up and allow 3rd party TRUE multi-tasking for 3rd party apps. It actually made some sense to not allow it for the initial release, it could have been a nightmare with an early OS and not that many apps anyways, developers had to get fancy and had to stay smart and honest, or their app would be killed with the quickness.
But it is time to free the OS to do some core things that it is really lacking:
1) True Multitasking
2) Copy and Paste
3) HTML5 and Flash support in IE
4) Third party web browsers
5) full direct camera access to apps
6) separate audio levels for media, ringtones, alarm (android really nailed this one)
of course other bugs and stuff, but these are the main issues for me. I don't blame MS for how they handled tombstoning and multi-tasking initially, but it's time (with efficiency) to catch up with the rest of the herd.
tiwas said:
and I will not, unlike my other attempt, be fooled into a pissing contest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pillsburydoughman said:
It has nothing to do with developers. If an OS is well written it will handle multitasking just fine, it's a nice excuse but a lame one. My old blackberry with a 400mhz processor and displays graphic icons can multi-task. Windows phone 7 with a 1ghz processor and is primarily text based won't allow it.
The keyword here is won't. We all know it's capable of doing it so why won't MS allow it? This is the reason why many major instant message apps are not available for this platform. What's the point of having an instant messager if it gets tombstoned when you switch screens? Big usability hole here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tiwas said:
Thanks
See the post below yours for confirmation that people won't read, but will gladly complain
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not going to get into any ranting or raving or anything on this one, but please don't bash everyone who does not agree with you in this thread or claim they don't read.
The guy had a legitimate post about tombstoning an instant messenger and I have pointed out other times where MS drops the ball on this mulit-tasking issue.
Your OP is a good post and helps clear up some things, but you have to understand that there are real concerns with the OS not allowing 3rd party multi-tasking and just flaming anyone who does not think that this is the best way for the OS to operate.
It wasn't bashing. I was simply pointing out that he hadn't read the whole thing, as he, like you, didn't really understand the concept of multitasking.
Anyway, I'm not going to start arguing with you again.
pillsburydoughman said:
It has nothing to do with developers. If an OS is well written it will handle multitasking just fine, it's a nice excuse but a lame one. My old blackberry with a 400mhz processor and displays graphic icons can multi-task. Windows phone 7 with a 1ghz processor and is primarily text based won't allow it.
The keyword here is won't. We all know it's capable of doing it so why won't MS allow it? This is the reason why many major instant message apps are not available for this platform. What's the point of having an instant messager if it gets tombstoned when you switch screens? Big usability hole here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WP7 definitely has the capbility of multi tasking, or you won't be playing music while using IE. MS limited the multi tasking for 3rd party apps.
Your old phone or android phone can do multitanking without any system limit. As I know it's free for Android application to create background services. However it causes significant lag and battery drain. My captivate lose 4% power per hour on standby and I cannot even locate which app is causing such battery drain.
MS learned from apple that it's more important to keep the device running smooth than to let apps mess the phone up.
Who cares what you call it. People want to have a messenger or non zune music player in the background while they do other things and be able to QUICKLY respond to it. BASICALLY most people want what apple calls multitasking/fast app switching. Only certain things allowed and a proper save state when when leaving the app. It works great on the iPhone and i dont care what people say its simple and effective.
can WP7 multitask?
tiwas said:
It wasn't bashing. I was simply pointing out that he hadn't read the whole thing, as he, like you, didn't really understand the concept of multitasking.
Anyway, I'm not going to start arguing with you again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well I think we both understand the concept of multi-tasking, just disagree with you on the wiseness of not allowing third party apps to be able to do so, someone disagreeing with you isn't the same thing as not understanding something; multi-tasking is actually a pretty easy concept to understand.
I don't want to argue with you again either, I just also don't want readers of this thread to be misinformed and to get all viewpoints regarding WP7's lack of multi-tasking support and then they can decide if they agree or not, but it doesn't mean that the subject is not understood.
I have no desire to start any beef on this thread, just keep in mind that when you start a thread you open a discussion open to disagreements, these don't mean that people don't read or don't understand necessarily. Don't be afraid to be wrong, it happens to everyone. We're all here to get the most out of our devices anyways.
So, you are shazaming a song on the radio, and get a phone call or a txt - will wp7 tombstone the live radio for you too?
Anthonok said:
Who cares what you call it. People want to have a messenger or non zune music player in the background while they do other things and be able to QUICKLY respond to it. BASICALLY most people want what apple calls multitasking/fast app switching. Only certain things allowed and a proper save state when when leaving the app. It works great on the iPhone and i dont care what people say its simple and effective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apple add this feature not until their 4th generation system
Let's see what the mango update will give us.
amtrakcn said:
Apple add this feature not until their 4th generation system
Let's see what the mango update will give us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what so they will add this in the 9 generation?(if you count 6.1 and 6.5)
Wow
vetvito said:
what so they will add this in the 9 generation?(if you count 6.1 and 6.5)
Wow
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's named WP7 but it's ACTUALLY WP1.
WM is designed to be a lite version of desktop windows with phone features
That's why it was powerful while hurting user experience
vetvito said:
can WP7 multitask?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should read my full post. It's explained
I am absolutely sure big companies will be allowed to run in the background, and it's probably just a question about time before we get MSN Messenger running properly in the background.
There are other uses, like streaming music, but as for the suggestions of running GPS software with turn by turn instructions (you shouldn't play games or do anything with your phone while driving!) and having a game active in the background without letting your character die (cool! Let's spin our wheels! We're not going anywhere, but we sure are spending gas! ) are plain silly...
Ok, on my list of programs that will benefit from actually running in the background, I can only think of two now, but please help me put more on the list:
* Music streaming
* Messaging
vetvito said:
can WP7 multitask?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nothing other than Zune right now
tiwas said:
but as for the suggestions of running GPS software with turn by turn instructions (you shouldn't play games or do anything with your phone while driving!) and having a game active in the background without letting your character die (cool! Let's spin our wheels! We're not going anywhere, but we sure are spending gas! ) are plain silly...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well GPS would nice since sometimes you're the passenger and you still want turn by turn while gaming or emailing, so it needs to be supported in the mango update too.
Hi fellow XDA lovers
I just want to remind you all that we don't want a flame war here so keep it on topic please.
amtrakcn said:
Apple add this feature not until their 4th generation system
Let's see what the mango update will give us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes it took them an extremely long time because apple is stubborn (or should i say Steve Jobs) and it is disappointing that Microsoft chose to pull an apple with WP7. But at least apple updated the iPhone....
lqaddict said:
So, you are shazaming a song on the radio, and get a phone call or a txt - will wp7 tombstone the live radio for you too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I should probably be able to run in the background if you get a call. I can play games while on the phone, but it leaves a nasty orange block on the top of the screen to notify you that your on the phone. As far txt messaging go, yea that's a bummer. I just click the message when it comes up, respond, then click back to go to the game I was playing. Just hope that game saved your previous state.
Hey guys, came across this great article about jelly bean and I wonder what you guys think about it. I really agree with some of the points he makes.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/09/18/ux-things-i-hate-about-android/
Read this article as well and yes he does make some good and valid points. However, Android is still a work in progress according to Matias Duarte. As much as Jelly Bean has improved the user experience there is still a ways to go to polishing the OS.
Here is a good follow up article you might want to check out:
http://www.androidcentral.com/duarte-i-m-third-way-where-i-want-be-android
He makes some good points, but also shows that he doesn't seem to understand Android programming at all.
If you open something within an app directly from a widget (his Gmail example), then obviously the back key would go one layer higher within the app. Opening an email from a widget layers home->gmail->email, not home->email.
Also, icons opening the "wrong" app. He uses Maps and Latitude as an example. Well, considering that Latitude is built on the Maps framework (and presumably calls an instance of Maps in order to operate), it makes complete sense that opening Maps would open the active Latitude session when one exists.
Other items just seemed like whining. For example, the section regarding the Google Voice icon. He makes the base assumption that people use it primarily for texting when texting is certainly not the primary function of the app. The app's primary function is voicemail, followed closely by VOIP calling. Texting is easily a tertiary function, even if it has been embraced by the community. [Edit: As mentioned below, I was incorrect regarding VOIP, which would make texting the secondary function of the app.]
Don't get me wrong. There were some good points, but I was shaking my head through a lot of that article.
Cilraaz said:
The app's primary function is voicemail, followed closely by VOIP calling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there is no voip from the google voice app itself. when you make a call with it, it basically calls the GV number + the number you are actually wanting to call.
Zepius said:
there is no voip from the google voice app itself. when you make a call with it, it basically calls the GV number + the number you are actually wanting to call.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My mistake. I assumed it was VOIP rather than call-chaining, based on the app prompting if Voice should be used for international calls. So at that point, texting would become the secondary function.
Thanks for the info.
Cilraaz said:
He makes some good points, but also shows that he doesn't seem to understand Android programming at all.
If you open something within an app directly from a widget (his Gmail example), then obviously the back key would go one layer higher within the app. Opening an email from a widget layers home->gmail->email, not home->email.
Also, icons opening the "wrong" app. He uses Maps and Latitude as an example. Well, considering that Latitude is built on the Maps framework (and presumably calls an instance of Maps in order to operate), it makes complete sense that opening Maps would open the active Latitude session when one exists.
Other items just seemed like whining. For example, the section regarding the Google Voice icon. He makes the base assumption that people use it primarily for texting when texting is certainly not the primary function of the app. The app's primary function is voicemail, followed closely by VOIP calling. Texting is easily a tertiary function, even if it has been embraced by the community.
Don't get me wrong. There were some good points, but I was shaking my head through a lot of that article.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although you are totally right, you have to look at it from a consumer's point of view. And they won't think "hey, of course the back button goes to the underlying Gmail menu", they'll think "wtf.? I was on the home screen before I tapped that mail on the widget. Why did it take me into the Gmail overview now?"
The same is even more true for Latitude. It is obvious for us tech-enthusiasts that Latitude is just more or less a part of maps. But I guess most other people never even give a thought to this, so they're just confused why the Maps icon would open a (seemingly) completely different service.
Also I'm sure the author of the article knows all this as well as anybody. But he tries to look from the consumer's point of view.
To the article: I mostly agree with his points. Play store not remembering my scroll position and the different sizes of some icons (and even more the almost overlapping icon names sometimes) are things that bugged me too. But mixed UI designs and that calculator bug are just things that happen if you roll out such a major update with significant UI changes. It's nothing I get even slightly mad about.
qwer23 said:
Although you are totally right, you have to look at it from a consumer's point of view. And they won't think "hey, of course the back button goes to the underlying Gmail menu", they'll think "wtf.? I was on the home screen before I tapped that mail on the widget. Why did it take me into the Gmail overview now?"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can understand it from a consumer's point of view, but how would it be resolved programmatically? If we start requiring a pointer to where a screen was opened from, you increase the memory footprint of every app. It might also cause some problems with app deconstruction. In the Gmail example, pressing the back button deconstructs the single email instance, but if a pointer were to tell it to go back to the home screen because we got to it from a widget, do we deconstruct the base Gmail app also? What if the widget puts you 4 layers into an app? Not only would the pointers again add to the app's memory footprint, but we have the deconstruction issue on a larger level.
I'm not the greatest programmer (especially in Java), but the "inelegant" way that it works now seems to have a few positives for both devs and users.
qwer23 said:
The same is even more true for Latitude. It is obvious for us tech-enthusiasts that Latitude is just more or less a part of maps. But I guess most other people never even give a thought to this, so they're just confused why the Maps icon would open a (seemingly) completely different service.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, I understand the consumer side of things, but is Maps opening Latitude more confusing than having Maps kill off Latitude? The user would then just try to re-open Latitude and be confused as to why the prior instance wasn't running. If Maps wouldn't kill off Latitude, then it would have to create a second instance of itself, which again has a negative impact on the app's memory footprint.
------------
I understand a general "hey, it should work like this instead", but there are plenty of reasons why it works the way it does now. Android might be able to get "perfect" functionality, but it would likely require some dumbing down of multitasking (either more process suspension instead of true(r) multitasking or the memory manager would be more likely to kill off background processes). I don't at all doubt these are discussions going on at Google, though.
Cilraaz said:
[...]
I understand a general "hey, it should work like this instead", but there are plenty of reasons why it works the way it does now. Android might be able to get "perfect" functionality, but it would likely require some dumbing down of multitasking (either more process suspension instead of true(r) multitasking or the memory manager would be more likely to kill off background processes). I don't at all doubt these are discussions going on at Google, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks Cilraaz, you really shed some light upon the deeper reasons for the sometimes odd behaviour of the back button and app layers. I'm no programmer at all, so I didn't know all this would add to the memory footprint of the apps and would affect developing in such a major way.
After reading your post I suggest we can be happy with some minor incosistencies and enjoy true multitasking instead of dumbing down our phones Again thanks for your nice clarification!
Some good stuff in this thread.
"complains about back button not taking him home, doesn't use home button"
crixley said:
"complains about back button not taking him home, doesn't use home button"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not what he complained about. He complained about the back button behaving inconsistently.
I find it actually works very logically. If i click on one email in my widget to read it and then use the back button to go back, it makes sense to be taken to my inbox so i can read more messages, instead of being taken back to home screen and selecting a new email from there. Its more practical in case you get like 10 emails at one, which won´t fit in the widget all at once anyway. If i wanted to go back to the home screen, hey there is the home button.
That sounds like one corner case where the behaviour works in your favor, that doesn't mean it's right. It used to work better. For example if you have Navigation open, and select and email from the notification then you are brought to the email. Then when you hit back it brings you to your Inbox (which you have no reason to go to) then when you hit back again it brings you to your home screen. In previous versions of Android when you hit back from the email you are reading it would take you directly back to Navigation. That is what you most likely want, and that is what the Android documentation says should happen. But all too often it does not.
Totally agree with this article. I love Jelly Bean, and Android, but ultimately, it lacks a hell of a lot of polish. This is where iOS is still leagues ahead (and for that matter, so is WP7/8), I forgive it because it is a very open and powerful platform, but it is still a platform for the techie, and has a long way to go before it is as friendly and approachable as its rivals IMO.
The same sorts of arguments have been leveled at PCs for years and are equally valid.
Like it or not, most people AREN'T techies and this is why the likes of Apple are so successful, because they understand this and bring out an OS that is generally intuitive to average joe. Ironically I find some of the ways their software works confusing in places (particularly OSX) but that is more down to my "techie" approach and being set in my ways, as most techies are.
Well, he has some valid ponts, but most of the time, he is wrong. Especially for the back button.
e34v8 said:
Well, he has some valid ponts, but most of the time, he is wrong. Especially for the back button.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you please tell me how he is wrong, specially if Android documentation says that the function of back button is X, and, sometimes you get Y, sometimes you get Z, and sometimes you get X?
Either document that back button has a bunch of functions that no one knows until you use it in a given context with a given app, or, give it a consistent behavior (and I'm not discussing which one would be better).... It is understandable when 3rd party software doesn't behave 100% as documented, but, built in phone apps should be consistent and provide the same experience...
Great article. A lot of those things drive me nuts, the icon size and back button in particular.
Another annoying thing the back button does is, for example, if you have been using the Play Store before, then you open an app that links to a Play Store page. Once you have seen the page and press back, rather than it taking you back to the app, the back button will just traverse through all the pages that you have been looking at on the Play Store in your previous session.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
crixley said:
"complains about back button not taking him home, doesn't use home button"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I found that amusing as well.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
pfmiller said:
That sounds like one corner case where the behaviour works in your favor, that doesn't mean it's right. It used to work better. For example if you have Navigation open, and select and email from the notification then you are brought to the email. Then when you hit back it brings you to your Inbox (which you have no reason to go to) then when you hit back again it brings you to your home screen. In previous versions of Android when you hit back from the email you are reading it would take you directly back to Navigation. That is what you most likely want, and that is what the Android documentation says should happen. But all too often it does not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe the "back" button should be replaced by a "higher level" (hope it's the right term ) button. Maybe in this case his function would be more logical.
However I agree on almost every point in the article