Hope Windows 10 will have unrestricted multitasking?

[a5cent]

To me, if a background app isn't updating in real time, it's not multitasking. To that end, only BlackBerry's QNX achieves that in today's day and age. Symbian and webOS had it, but they're pushing up daisies at Woodlawn.

We're not talking about background apps, or at least I'm not. We're talking about the more abstract ability to multitask in general. WP can multitask, and the background processes do update in real-time as well. That is multitasking, at least if we're going by the technical definition of the term.

I see no point to allowing an entire app to multitask when it's impossible to display more than one app at a time. W10M might change that, for example if it implements something like W8's windows snapping. Then it would make sense for the two visible apps to multitask, but that shouldn't allow the third or fourth app in the background to divert resources from what the user is doing with the two foreground apps.

 

[fatclue_98]

We're not talking about background apps, or at least I'm not. We're talking about the more abstract ability to multitask in general. WP can multitask, and the background processes do update in real-time as well. That is multitasking, at least if we're going by the technical definition of the term.

I see no point to allowing an entire app to multitask when it's impossible to display more than one app at a time. W10M might change that, for example if it implements something like W8's windows snapping. Then it would make sense for the two visible apps to multitask, but that shouldn't allow the third or fourth app in the background to divert resources from what the user is doing with the two foreground apps.

I have the dual window feature on my G3. Since one app is suspended, I find it a totally useless feature. If WP did operate in real time, we would never need to see a resume screen right? I'm not a developer which is why I'm asking. My Passport didn't have these problems. Whatever was in the Active Frames updated and never had to "reload". I could follow a ball game just by cycling in and out of what I was supposedly working on.

 

[a5cent]

I have the dual window feature on my G3. Since one app is suspended, I find it a totally useless feature.

No argument there! If an OS can show more than one app on screen simultaneously, then both deserve equal access to the CPU and both should fully multitask. I'm not trying to say that apps shouldn't multitask in general. I'm saying that those apps that aren't visible to the user (in the background) shouldn't be allowed to willy-nilly divert processing resources away from what you (the user) is doing. IMHO that should be fully under your control.

Just in it's current state, having more than one WP app run at once makes no sense.

If WP did operate in real time, we would never need to see a resume screen right? I'm not a developer which is why I'm asking. My Passport didn't have these problems. Whatever was in the Active Frames updated and never had to "reload". I could follow a ball game just by cycling in and out of what I was supposedly working on.

I assume that by "real-time" you mean support for unrestricted multitasking (background apps can run as much as they want and whenever they want). That unrestricted multitasking could remedy the resuming issue is a very popular misconception. The simplest proof I can give you is iOS. On iOS, apps multitask in the exact same way they do on WP (they don't), yet iOS has no problem instantly resuming apps. The root cause lies elsewhere...

The resuming delay is a consequence of funky decisions related to navigation and page initialization. In some scenarios, when an app is brought back to the foreground, the app may be forced to rebuild parts of it's UI, which for unrelated reasons is something WP is really slow at. I don't understand why all this UI rebuilding is required. It looks stupid to me, so I can't explain what MS was thinking. I suspect it was motivated by WP7's very low 256MB memory requirements, which would mean we're dealing with legacy issues that are coming back to bite us.

We all agree that MS really needs to fix the resuming issue... desperately. Whatever the solution is, it won't have anything to do with multitasking however. The simplest solution would be to just have each app resume from it's current state in memory without any rebuilding at all taking place. I have no idea why it doesn't already work that way.

 

[tk-093]

Wouldn't true multitasking be annoying? I'm playing a game and my phone rings and I answer the phone but the game continues on in the background instead of pausing/suspending? Same for watching Netflix... the movie just keeps playing on in the background while I'm trying to talk on the phone or reply to an email?

There just isn't a need for any true multitasking, IMO. The pseudo multitasking we get in Android/iOS/WP is just fine with a few tweaks.

 

[tk-093]

To me, if a background app isn't updating in real time, it's not multitasking. To that end, only BlackBerry's QNX achieves that in today's day and age. Symbian and webOS had it, but they're pushing up daisies at Woodlawn.

Even BB10 will suspend stuff like YouTube when you make a call. It also won't let me open two browser tabs and play two different YouTube videos at the same time. Obviously those are things you never want to do anyway, but the fact you can't means it really isn't "true multitasking." :grin::grin:

 

[AndyCalling]

We're not talking about background apps, or at least I'm not. We're talking about the more abstract ability to multitask in general. WP can multitask, and the background processes do update in real-time as well. That is multitasking, at least if we're going by the technical definition of the term.

I see no point to allowing an entire app to multitask when it's impossible to display more than one app at a time. W10M might change that, for example if it implements something like W8's windows snapping. Then it would make sense for the two visible apps to multitask, but that shouldn't allow the third or fourth app in the background to divert resources from what the user is doing with the two foreground apps.

I agree with all that but with one proviso, that (with user permission) an app can be registered as an exception to the norm. Flexibility, under user control, is rarely a bad idea.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Even BB10 will suspend stuff like YouTube when you make a call. It also won't let me open two browser tabs and play two different YouTube videos at the same time. Obviously those are things you never want to do anyway, but the fact you can't means it really isn't "true multitasking." :grin::grin:

LOL. I've done that already on desktop browsers. I've accidentally opened two or more tabs with different YouTube videos.

As weird as it might sound, I've seen posts on CrackBerry where people asked if they could listen to music during phone calls.

Sent from my Moto X using Tapatalk

 

[AndyCalling]

Being able to play jingles down the phone whilst 'on air' to a pal would remind me of my old radio days. Sounds odd, but you've really grabbed me with that one. Now all I need is a way to digitize old jingle carts...

If this ever happens I may lose all my friends in the first week. ~

 

[tk-093]

I agree with all that but with one proviso, that (with user permission) an app can be registered as an exception to the norm. Flexibility, under user control, is rarely a bad idea.

That's a good idea, but that option should be buried in some advanced/developer type settings so if you enable it, it is because you WANT to enable it..

 

[AndyCalling]

That's a good idea, but that option should be buried in some advanced/developer type settings so if you enable it, it is because you WANT to enable it..

Well, I was thinking more of in the app permissions settings (which I hear are set to be more comprehensive in W10) so an app can request permission on first run and you can accept or deny. Then adjust later in the permissions settings. Much like the permission settings in W8.1 on the PC would handle it if they had a multitasking permission in the mix. I like this permission system on the PC and I think it would translate well to the phone and could be usefully expanded. After all, this is no worse (and potentially less risky) than allowing an app to access your phone contacts, for example.

 

[werner6769]

Windows 8.1 does not have any kind of resuming and it even runs on tablets with 1 gig of ram. I thought maybe since they were unifying the platform that it would be more like the desktop system of multitasking?

 

[AndyCalling]

Windows 8.1 does not have any kind of resuming and it even runs on tablets with 1 gig of ram. I thought maybe since they were unifying the platform that it would be more like the desktop system of multitasking?

W8.1 on desktop does tombstone metro apps that are not on screen. It could also do with a multitasking exception permission as often metro apps will (for example) only update the tile if they are given one of the few start screen slots, though this does not seem to be true for all apps. W8.1 and WP8.1 could be significantly improved in this area.

 

[fatclue_98]

Even BB10 will suspend stuff like YouTube when you make a call. It also won't let me open two browser tabs and play two different YouTube videos at the same time. Obviously those are things you never want to do anyway, but the fact you can't means it really isn't "true multitasking." :grin::grin:

I imagine having 2 different apps "talking" over each other is problematic at best. I have 2 ears but I can only hear 1 thing at a time and even then there's no guarantee I'm really listening. There ain't a married man on Earth that can dispute this.

 

[fatclue_98]

As weird as it might sound, I've seen posts on CrackBerry where people asked if they could listen to music during phone calls.

No Laura, there isn't a Muzak app yet. If there is, Neil Diamond's the richest man on Earth.

 

[a5cent]

I agree with all that but with one proviso, that (with user permission) an app can be registered as an exception to the norm. Flexibility, under user control, is rarely a bad idea.

Flexibility to do what?

I doubt you're suggesting that it should be possible to grant an app permission to do more or less anything (although others have). That kind of flexibility always affects far more than just the app receiving that sort of permission, the side effects of which (e.g. random stuttering in random apps when the "exceptional app" rips the CPU out from under them) the average user will never understand! We'll be back to the point where people need an enthusiast friend or family member to help them administer their phone and fix problems, just like their PC. You and I can help ourselves, but the average Joe hates that. That's precisely where Windows remaining security issues and bad reputation comes from. Windows can do almost anything, and it's precisely the side affects of that flexibility that have lead to so few loving it.

For their smartphone OSes, Apple and MS both independently ended up taking the exact same approach to multitasking. I'm sure it's occurred to most here that this isn't mere coincidence, and likely happened for very good reasons. It seems to me that most here are forgetting that. It's simply not possible to grant apps the freedom to do whatever they want whenever they want, particularly on a resource restricted smartphone, without sacrificing some of WP's other benefits. WP's battery life, it's smoothness on low-end devices, and its security percautions aren't worth sacrificing for this vague notion of flexibility, particularly because this entire thread has so far surfaced but one concrete example of a problem where the current multitasking solution isn't enough (the flashlight problem, which is easily solved with a background agent that can control the light).

A consumer oriented computing device, who's software has the broad flexibility to do anything (particularly if it is under user control) is almost always a bad idea. We've had two decades of experience proving to us that if something can be screwed up, users will screw it up, but they will blame the OS regardless. WP just can't afford that.

 

[chmun77]

We're not talking about background apps, or at least I'm not. We're talking about the more abstract ability to multitask in general. WP can multitask, and the background processes do update in real-time as well. That is multitasking, at least if we're going by the technical definition of the term.

WP can multitask and we know that. All MS native apps can multitask otherwise we will not be able to listen to music while surfing on the browser. But when comes to 3rd party apps, things are totally differently!! Most they can do is updating the respective tiles in the background and nothing else. Like I said in my previous post, the podcast+ pro, Manga blaze pro, TV drama download app, etc will have their downloads suspended once they are sent to the background aka not having the focus on screen. All of them have the running in background option turned on. I have contacted the developers and all of them replied saying that it is the limitation of the OS. Why so? MS logic is to conserve battery. But why conserve when we are actually using the apps?? Is ridiculous!

I see no point to allowing an entire app to multitask when it's impossible to display more than one app at a time. W10M might change that, for example if it implements something like W8's windows snapping. Then it would make sense for the two visible apps to multitask, but that shouldn't allow the third or fourth app in the background to divert resources from what the user is doing with the two foreground apps.

I beg to diff here. Users are not going to stare at one app at a time and wait for their tasks to be completed. This is the modern age and Windows Phone should work like modern OSes. Why the need for apps to be visible in order to be multitasking?? It doesn't make sense. As long as they are still having their individual queued jobs to be done, just let them run. Unless you are telling me that it is a 512MB budget phone hence the limitations. But no, even my 1520 is behaving like a year 2000 phone when comes to multitasking.

 

[chmun77]

Wouldn't true multitasking be annoying? I'm playing a game and my phone rings and I answer the phone but the game continues on in the background instead of pausing/suspending? Same for watching Netflix... the movie just keeps playing on in the background while I'm trying to talk on the phone or reply to an email?

There just isn't a need for any true multitasking, IMO. The pseudo multitasking we get in Android/iOS/WP is just fine with a few tweaks.

That's why we need smart OS. Since multimedia will require speakers, screen and other controls, a phone call will have higher priority and take over the control. As for watching a movie while replying to emails, that's what I do on my Note 4 and that's call split window or Picture-in-Picture which Apple demo recently as well. But if you are downloading something off the Internet, why the need to stop it just because you are picking up a call or when switches over to other apps?? That's the big the difference when comes to multitasking between Android and Windows Phone?

 

[a5cent]

WP can multitask and we know that. All MS native apps can multitask otherwise we will not be able to listen to music while surfing on the browser. But when comes to 3rd party apps, things are totally differently!! Most they can do is updating the respective tiles in the background and nothing else...

Seriously, you have no idea what you are talking about. Every single point you made in the post I quoted from is incorrect. I just don't understand how you (and one or two others) can essentially make up a problem, and then start pointing fingers and placing blame, particularly when those points are so easily disproven... no skills or developer knowledge required.

A)
That MS' own apps can play music in the background while 3rd party apps can't is BS. Download pretty much any music app from the store to prove yourself wrong. It's astounding that you think live tiles are the only background capability WP has..

B)
I doubt multiple developers told you that it's impossible to download files in the background due to an OS limitation. If they did then they were just not interested in providing the feature you requested, and wanted to shut you up, by sending you off to complain about MS and WP rather than their own app. It's more likely that you just didn't understand what they were saying however.

Either way, I already provided an example of a 3rd party app that CAN download files in the background. Download UC Browser and easily prove yourself wrong again, but no...

C)
All your other opinions are derived from your incorrect understanding of the above.

Conclusion:

At this point, continuing to complain about multitasking on WP, a topic you've shown to have no understanding of, just makes you look silly.

WP obviously has problems in the multitasking department, but with few exceptions (no, the feature-based multitasking on WP is not perfect) they are not a consequence of OS limitations.

We all know that WP has an app quality and feature gap, but as soon as "multitasking" is thrown into the debate, developers have no responsibilities and it's all WP's fault... somehow, on this specific issue, a sizable portion of the WP community is still stuck in 2011 and using WP7.

 

[AndyCalling]

Flexibility to do what?

I doubt you're suggesting that it should be possible to grant an app permission to do more or less anything (although others have).

A consumer oriented computing device, who's software has the broad flexibility to do anything (particularly if it is under user control) is almost always a bad idea. We've had two decades of experience proving to us that if something can be screwed up, users will screw it up, but they will blame the OS regardless. WP just can't afford that.

Yea, I'm not talking about handing out licence for an app to do anything. I should have been more specific and detailed (there was gin involved...). I am really thinking of well defined exceptions for a specific purpose. So giving access to short multi-tasking CPU time slices for some things (such as is already done for tile updates on the phone). I think it would be handy, though, for the user to be able to choose the exceptions front and centre on first run of an app, rather than digging for the current background app settings that happen with no gatekeeper style explicit user permissions before they take a background slot.
I like this in W8.1 for PC but that can get restrictive and some apps end up needing a lock screen slot that shouldn't be necessary. I'm trying to say we need a bit more flexibility from MS but it has to come with tight explicit control by the user. Thing is, universal apps will need to use the same methods on a desktop PC as on the phone, and we need a method that doesn't bring phone restrictions down hard on the desktop PC. Wiggle room. Yea, you are right to a degree though, I do get annoyed by the power of devices being limited to the lowest user common denominator. Finding a way to restrict unless enabled seems the best (though not perfect) balance to me. Currently WP seems to enable unless restricted for background processes which is the wrong way round, as it requires more caution as to what that permission can allow an app to do.

 

[a5cent]

But if you are downloading something off the Internet, why the need to stop it just because you are picking up a call or when switches over to other apps?? That's the big the difference when comes to multitasking between Android and Windows Phone?

Or more correctly, it's the big difference between the Android app that does it, and the Windows app you're using that doesn't.

I'd agree with you if we were blaming MS for not making the standard approach for file downloading the one that does so asynchronously and in the background, but we're not.