Hope Windows 10 will have unrestricted multitasking?

[vlad0]

You do realise that it was done to save power. I think it's a more efficient way of power management to pause the apps where they are when pushed to the background. I am okay with it. A second of delay can be tolerated for that "resuming" screen.

Have you used a Symbian smartphone? Despite the real time multitasking it provides great battery life.

 

[vlad0]

Blackberry's

Yes, anything running on QNX has proper multitasking. Qnx and EKA2 (Symbian) are very similar in that regard.

The 'modern' environment on windows is way too aggressive.. even if you have core i7 with 8gb ram it will still close/suspend apps for no reason.. or, there might be a reason bit then the whole model is flawed since Symbian has shown that if you have efficient enough code you can multitask on 512ram and ARM11 without a problem.

 

[link68759]

i wonder why my Xbox music has a resuming screen!! Can't they fine tune their own apps!!

/s

I know that was sarcasm but I'd like to take this opportunity to elaborate.

Xbox music flashes the "resuming" screen momentarily while loading, and only rarely (once a week perhaps) does the app bug out and is left resuming for any longer. When the multitasking is working flawlessly, which is most of the time, it is a pleasurable and seamless experience, but as I said, we can always hope that microsoft improves it even more in 10.

For those of you under the illusion that iOS doesn't do this as well: iOS shows you a snapshot image of where you left off in the app while the app is resuming. It tricks you into thinking the app is there, but it's just not responsive for a second. The app is not there, the loading time is not any faster. You're looking at a picture of the app, and it creates the illusion of faster loading times. Microsoft chose to not take that approach and use a resuming screen instead (perhaps because apps often don't resume to the same exact page).

 

[Onager1286]

Microsoft chose to not take that approach and use a resuming screen instead (perhaps because apps often don't resume to the same exact page).

And the apps not resuming to exactly where you left off is OK because... why exactly? I've always found that really irritating.

 

[stenson625]

True multitasking is needed in MS WP 10! Heck!

 

[Legoboyii]

Pluses for true multitasking is no resuming screens, possibility for having 2 apps running on same screen, improved useability and experience I guess.

Negatives is bigger battery drain and some lagging depending on the apps.

Personally I think they should just make it an option for the end users whether to suspend apps or not when put in background. Some may prefer the current way since it is less painful on the battery, but others with larger and stronger phones with bigger batteries will prefer true multitasking.
So it all depends on how you want to use it. My 2?

 

[muvig]

we need this sure, for example, i want to type something written on a paper but its night time where there is no light, i switch on the touch application, the moment i open another application to type , the touch switches off, i have to memorize every thing or do the toggle.
here we have prepaid lines where one has to buy small airtime cards/vouchers which you have to scratch to reveal a 16 digit number that have to be typed. if you are in an area where there in no other source of light you are forced to toggle.

 

[PratikMade]

Be any type of multitasking at least give background downloads in some efficient way so that developers don't have to code their app for background downloads separately.

 

[manicottiK]

And the apps not resuming to exactly where you left off is OK because... why exactly? I've always found that really irritating.

The answer is context.

If a user starts an app that they had used just a few minutes ago, the user likely still remembers where they were. Because of that, there's a reasonable likelihood that either 1) they've gone back to the app to continue doing earlier work/reading/playing or 2) they can easily back get back into the context of the app to easily back out (i.e., their internal "back stack" is still in their memory).

If a user starts an app that they haven't used in several hours or days, they probably aren't continuing earlier work and likely don't recall the context of their last use. In that case, ignoring the history might make the most sense. How long a time gap the developer uses to determine if "this is continuation" vs "this is new launch" is up to the developer. (I use 10 minutes in one app that has a lot of detailed, layered content pages. I use forever is another app that doesn't have any depth to it.)

 

[manicottiK]

All of these calls for "true" multitasking and options to enable/disable it seem unlikely to be answered. You're all describing computers; the market appears to want appliances (i.e., complex devices, well enough designed to appear simple). The market of us posting here skews toward the more technical, but the larger market isn't and they just want something that works.

When people ask me for advise on phones, I ask them if they are already locked into an ecosystem (Apple, Google, Microsoft) and if they want to be simple users of their phones or masters of their phones. I generally advise staying within any current ecosystem (because I don't want to be their conversation support service!) and that "masters" get Android while "users" go with iOS or Windows.

 

[manicottiK]

One final thought: any time you see the word "true" come up in a technical argument, abandon hope of coming to closure. When "true" is used, the discussion participants have effectively already agreed to disagree about the topic under discussion.

I remember early Mac/Windows fights over true multitasking and true memory management. I'm sure that we could get into "true zoom" and "true image stabilization" as we discuss our cameras. There are calls for Live Tiles to become "true widgets."

It's truly time to give up on such discussions. :wink:

 

[SnailUK]

Personally I think they should just make it an option for the end users whether to suspend apps or not when put in background. Some may prefer the current way since it is less painful on the battery, but others with larger and stronger phones with bigger batteries will prefer true multitasking.
So it all depends on how you want to use it. My 2?

Which is lovely, but being that most developers don't even bother to code correctly for the ONE option they have at the moment, they won't bother to code correctly for multiple options.

They'll force you into running full multi-tasking, then the interweb will be a wash with everyone slating WP for horrendous battery usage.

 

[babbs79]

bro we r talking about real multi tasking ,if u were downloading some thing with uc browser,just hit the windows button ( thats what we do to send the app to the back ground),then open another app ,then send it back and call back uc, see what will happend the download will paused where we are,is that calling multi task ?,i used to play music ,at the time in back ground i download somthing with my download accltor,same time i used to play a game easily with my symbian phone ,still i have my symbian phone, still i m doing that,i dont think so its about the battery issues,its just windows cant multi task, its very poor platform,

 

[a5cent]

^ bro, WP can already do that, yo! :wink:

The feature already exists, but devs don't use it. You can call for MS to include "real" multitasking (or whatever the non-technical term for it is these days) until the cows come home. It won't change zilch if developers ignore it, as they currently do.

Admittedly there are limits to how many files can be queued up for download (I think it's five), so it doesn't work for every possible scenario, but it would probably work just fine for what you want.

You can see the feature in action in the store. No problem downloading apps in the background.

I'd say 95% of this thread makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. What consumers should be calling on MS to do, is to eliminate/remove every single way of downloading files except through the background file transfer mechanism. That would force developers to do it the way it's supposed to be done.

 

[Nokia5110]

Can't use the phone as a modem when making or receiving a call! My foot... That hurts when you are halfway downloading a 3.9 GB file.

Could call and download with a Nokia 5230....

Stylus, check

 

[noersetiawan]

I think what we really need is not true multitasking, which is power hungry. But OS improvements that kill that resuming and app refresh bug. Suspended app is good, as long as their download process is managed by OS download agent, file transfer process, music, etc, is handled by the OS dedicated agent once app went suspended, and allow the app to return to it's exact state, without refreshing, at least for last 10 apps. Low end devices now can't even hold 2-3 sometimes not even 1, yes, but even a 930 with its 2GB RAM resumes app. If it's for just for split second, it still resuming processes, which most app don't support and simply refresh.

 

[hinst]

Yes it is true, 99.9% of users don't need no true multitasking. So keep hoping; it won't happen. If you are one of that 0.1%, use Android, it is way better at multitasking. Yes it often closes apps when it's low on memory. But it still can do a lot more. Download in background. Torrent client in background. IRC client in background. Anything. And developers don't have to use silly APIs to make it work. Well, Android APIs are silly, but at least it is easier to make app work in background. Android can run apps in background and even (what a surprise) when the screen is turned off! I wonder how they achieved such effect?

MS, good luck with your moron-oriented system; keep degrading it. I was considering Windows 10 Mobile for a while, but seeing how it won't have multitasking again, I am not buying your DOS 2015.

 

[PepsimanLeh]

I think what we really need is not true multitasking, which is power hungry. But OS improvements that kill that resuming and app refresh bug. Suspended app is good, as long as their download process is managed by OS download agent, file transfer process, music, etc, is handled by the OS dedicated agent once app went suspended, and allow the app to return to it's exact state, without refreshing, at least for last 10 apps. Low end devices now can't even hold 2-3 sometimes not even 1, yes, but even a 930 with its 2GB RAM resumes app. If it's for just for split second, it still resuming processes, which most app don't support and simply refresh.

This. I am on 930 too, and I am kinda disappointed with how the apps resume. I mean, we have high specs right?

Previously I owned a 620 and I understand the apps resume and refresh because of its specs, but I expect better on 930.

 

[a5cent]

This. I am on 930 too, and I am kinda disappointed with how the apps resume. I mean, we have high specs right?

Previously I owned a 620 and I understand the apps resume and refresh because of its specs, but I expect better on 930.

Then your expectations are probably wrong. It sounds like you're expecting hardware specs to solve a software related issue (resuming), which is a fundamentally flawed idea.

Sometimes, throwing ever more powerful hardware at a software problem can make those problems shrink down to the point of becoming unnoticeable to users, but that isn't to say those problems are no longer there. They are, and will often remain perceivable on low-end hardware. Sometimes though, not even the best hardware is enough to make delays unperceivable, either because the operation is just too extensive for modern hardware to deal with quickly, or because the issue is not purely a performance problem at all, but a result of a particular software design or trade-off. That's what we've got here. Better specs can make the resuming issue less noticeable, like on your 930, but we're still far away from hardware that will make the issue completely unnoticeable.

Unless we're all willing to wait for a really long time (some will argue we already have), what we need to solve this issue is not better specs, but an OS that functions differently than it does today... and no... the way in which it must function differently isn't related to multitasking.

It would be far more accurate to refer to this as an issue related to task-switching, which is something completely different from multitasking.

[table="width: 1000"]
[tr]
[td]Multitasking [/td]
[td]the ability for hardware to effectively run, or at least appear to run, more than one software process simultaneously (has zilch to do with resuming).
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Task Switching [/td]
[td]user input is always only ever channelled to one software process at a time (no more then one app/program can ever be in the foreground at one time). This is true for all operating systems. Task switching refers to the act of switching the software process that is to receive user input (mouse clicks, key presses, etc) from one process to another.
[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

 

[PepsimanLeh]

I was expecting hardware to shrink the resuming time. I was expecting more RAM to remember my IE pages and not reload the pages when I go back. I thought I should but now maybe I should expect less, because now I know it's a software related issue and good hardware cannot solve that issue.

Maybe multitasking like iOS is desirable. For me. But does task-switching, lets say, let the flashlight remain open when I switch to another app?
Does it remember what I typed in the textbox in my WindowsCentral app when I go back to it?