Better multitasking menu

[TechFreak1]

In theory apps don't consume any power when in the background, but i've had my battery hammered by them now and then.

I know what you mean, everything is fine in theory but in practice not so much.

 

[cotras]

Like I said, those are the worst possible reasons to ask for a close-feature. Fix the problem! Don't add features to the OS with the sole purpose of making it easier to live with defective apps. Over time, such an approach just leads to a bloated mess of an OS.

Getting rid of the close button doesn't fix bugs.. Someone will have to run the apps while they're still buggy, so that faults are found and get reported/fixed. There is no way around it, and there is no reason to make life more miserable for those early users.

 

[a5cent]

Getting rid of the close button doesn't fix bugs..

That is a strange argument, because adding a close button doesn't fix bugs either. What it would do is give developers an excuse to never fix those bugs, because the OS offers a tolerable but clunky workaround.

What MS should do is evolve their APIs, so developers can't screw apps up to the extent that some have, including one of their own apps, namely IE. So, there are ways around problems of this specific type.

If you don't understand how ridiculous it is to add features to a smartphone OS, that serve no purpose other than defect management, then all that means is that you are willing to lower your expectations of WP far below the level I am willing to accept.

 

[Andre o Botelho]

Several times I lose a Call because I forgot to increase volume after using a loud app(games).
Even MS system apps(IE for example) are buggy. so a way to close apps is helpfull, better if you don't need it but wound't kill to have the option.
Funny how hard is to develop a app to this buggy OS and see a lot of people without knowlege saing that the developers are guilt, making buggy apps....

 

[a5cent]

Several times I lose a Call because I forgot to increase volume after using a loud app(games).
Even MS system apps(IE for example) are buggy. so a way to close apps is helpfull, better if you don't need it but wound't kill to have the option.
Funny how hard is to develop a app to this buggy OS and see a lot of people without knowlege saing that the developers are guilt, making buggy apps....

Instead of making false assumptions, I would suggest that you actually make an argument, which I'm sure is hidden in there somewhere... you might start by explaining how you relate the lack of better volume controls to a close-feature, which is what this thread is about.

 

[OzRob]

That is a strange argument, because adding a close button doesn't fix bugs either. What it would do is give developers an excuse to never fix those bugs, because the OS offers a tolerable but clunky workaround.

Well that's an even stranger argument. No developer worth the name would ignore a bug in their software because there's an easy way to close apps in the OS.

What MS should do is evolve their APIs, so developers can't screw apps up to the extent that some have, including one of their own apps, namely IE. So, there are ways around problems of this specific type.

Any API that prevented screw ups to the extent you are proposing would be so restrictive as to severely limit the functionality of the apps that can be produced. And the WP API is already quite (IMO too) restrictive in what it lets developers do.

If you don't understand how ridiculous it is to add features to a smartphone OS, that serve no purpose other than defect management, then all that means is that you are willing to lower your expectations of WP far below the level I am willing to accept.

Perhaps your expectations are far too high. A smartphone is a handheld computer. It's virtually impossible to eliminate all bugs from any reasonably powerful computer system, or the programs that run on it. So having an easy way to close a misbehaving program (rather than a tolerable but clunky workaround) is actually good user-centric design practice.

 

[a5cent]

Well that's an even stranger argument. No developer worth the name would ignore a bug in their software because there's an easy way to close apps in the OS.

I wasn't using the term "bug" only in the strictest sense of the word, but also to describe design flaws, like deep back stacks, or the fact that some apps just don't work as expected after switching back to them via the task switcher (like backwards navigation in IE, or not being able to return to an apps main page via the hardware back button). Developers ignore such "bugs" all the time, because Microsoft doesn't make it easy to find better solutions. That's not a strange argument, but common practice. Up until now, all the reasons mentioned for wanting a close-feature were design-flaw related, but for all those scenarios better solutions exist.

In this thread, I have for the first time heard somebody say they wanted a close-feature to dispose of WhatsApp, due to it crashing and becoming unresponsive. I've seen apps crash, but I've never heard of WP apps crashing in a way that left them hanging. A search on Google suggests that such behaviour is, if true at all, at least extremely rare. If bugs of that sort turned out to be far more common than I currently suspect they are, then I would change my mind and adopt your position (and adjust my opinion in regard to the potential of WP).

Any API that prevented screw ups to the extent you are proposing would be so restrictive as to severely limit the functionality of the apps that can be produced. And the WP API is already quite (IMO too) restrictive in what it lets developers do.

Are you seriously suggesting that no improvements can be made to how WP handles "fast resume"? Or deals with app state changes? Or that Microsoft couldn't deliver a UI component or two which offer a standardized way of navigation between app pages without piling onto the backstack? I see a lot of ways their APIs could be improved without limiting flexibility, and would also suggest that limiting flexibility in a few select places would actually be a good thing, like the depth of an app's backstack.

Perhaps your expectations are far too high. A smartphone is a handheld computer. It's virtually impossible to eliminate all bugs from any reasonably powerful computer system, or the programs that run on it. So having an easy way to close a misbehaving program (rather than a tolerable but clunky workaround) is actually good user-centric design practice.

Perhaps you are familiar with the difference between a computing appliance and a computer. I see a smartphone as the former. So does Apple. So does Microsoft. The idea is to limit some flexibility in exchange for reliability and ease of use. Seriously, if smartphones become as unreliable as an average consumer PC and require the same amount of administration to keep them running smoothly, then I'll stop using them. Adding said close-feature to deal with serious stability issues which an appliance should never have, is the opposite of good user-centric design practice. You're putting bugs at the centre of your thinking, not users...

WP and iOS are appliance OS', and they can achieve that level of stability. WP7 had already achieved it.

 

[OzRob]

WP and iOS are appliance OS', and they can achieve that level of stability. WP7 had already achieved it.

OK, well when WP8 achieves this miraculous state of grace, MS can safely and comfortably remove the ability to easily close an app. Until then, lets have it added.

 

[eruptflail]

At the core of the WP experience lies the idea, that users shouldn't be required to micromanage any aspect of their phone.

Yes, and that means we shouldn't have to, but we should be able to if we want. That's the issue. It is the phone owner's phone. If they desire to micromanage their phone, by all means they should. I honestly, can't think of a better, simpler, way to solve these problems. If I want to reset an app, why shouldn't I be able to tap a tiny x in the corner. I don't understand the resistance to such rudimentary techniques found on every other WINDOWS OS from Windows 95 to Windows 7. If a new feature isn't there to fix a real problem, the feature should never have been abandoned.

 

[a5cent]

OK, well when WP8 achieves this miraculous state of grace, MS can safely and comfortably remove the ability to easily close an app. Until then, lets have it added.

The fact that thousands of software project achieved that "state of grace" over the last two decades (including WP7) leads me to believe it isn't quite that miraculous.

Yes, and that means we shouldn't have to, but we should be able to if we want. That's the issue. It is the phone owner's phone. If they desire to micromanage their phone, by all means they should. <snipped> I don't understand the resistance to such rudimentary techniques...

Maintaining technical consistency and the expressiveness of an OS' UI is more important than catering to customers habits (habits can change) or customers with OCD. The lack of a close-feature tells us something about the OS. It tells us "you mustn't worry about this". That is in itself valuable information, and many people appreciate not having to do so. Consider also how very few people are willing to ever learn anything about the operating systems they use, other than what they manage to discern through the UI, and how that makes the UI's ability to convey such information all the more valuable.

Adding a close-feature amounts to WP making a false statement about itself. Not only is it misinformation, but it encourages users to engage in useless behaviour, as we don't gain anything by manually managing app lifecycles (with the exception of dealing with design-flaws, which should be dealt with by the design department, not outsourced to the task management department).

There are a few other reasons of a more technical nature, basically revolving around how such a close-feature complicates app development, but I'll skip those for now.

I honestly, can't think of a better, simpler, way to solve these problems.

That's probably the source of our differing views. IMHO I can think of better ways to solve these problems (app/OS related design-flaws). I mentioned a few of them in a previous post listing API improvements Microsoft should make.

 

[eruptflail]

That's probably the source of our differing views. IMHO I can think of better ways to solve these problems (app/OS related design-flaws). I mentioned a few of them in a previous post listing API improvements Microsoft should make.

That sort of solution doesn't address all the problems. If I want to restart an app, closing it is the best way to do that. MS has a way to close apps already, the back button. Also nothing anyone will ever do will stop apps from crashing/having bugs. I get that you think that WP8 is so awesome that we don't actually NEED to close apps, but until the world is perfect, we need to close apps. Sometimes stuff goes wrong, and sometimes apps like whatsapp suck the living hell out of your battery even if they're "paused" in the background. Certain apps don't "pause" in the background. Just because it doesn't apply to you doesn't mean that it shouldn't be added. You've given me no reason this shouldn't be added.

API improvements won't make all the problems go away, because if you can build it, you can break it. Having an "X" isn't a bad thing. If someone wants to "x" out their apps, they should be able to. If you don't want to, no big deal - don't.

 

[cotras]

Adding a close-feature amounts to WP making a false statement about itself. Not only is it misinformation, but it encourages users to engage in useless behaviour, as we don't gain anything by manually managing app lifecycles.

Yes we do. Happier users, more sales. If MS is so afraid of corrupting our minds with this feature, they could make it a configuration option that defaults to disabled, so only us, already lost and uncurable souls will be affected.

 

[a5cent]

That sort of solution doesn't address all the problems.

What it can do is solve all the design-flaw related problems. I don't think anything else needs solving.

According to you (and two others) we also need the close-feature to dispose of apps that have crashed and become unresponsive and which the OS couldn't automatically dispose of (thereby leaving us with no way of getting rid of the hung up app beyond restarting the device). I couldn't find a single complaint about any such thing outside of this thread. That doesn't seem convincing, but if you can show that such a problem is more than just a fluke and almost non-existent occurrence, then I'll gladly change my mind. If it's really a problem, that shouldn't be difficult.

I get that you think that WP8 is so awesome that we don't actually NEED to close apps, but until the world is perfect, we need to close apps.

We've defined the one situation which really requires the close-feature. Instead of exaggerating some of my statements to make them seem absurd (which is a pretty lame tactic), you should be making the case that the problem you think needs solving actually exists.

Sometimes stuff goes wrong, and sometimes apps like whatsapp suck the living hell out of your battery even if they're "paused" in the background..

The OS providing a close feature would do nothing to improve that situation, because closing WhatsApp doesn't unregister WhatsApp's background audio task from the system. That is what is causing WhatsApp's issues, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing here. Completely different topic...

You've given me no reason this shouldn't be added.

And you've given me no reason that it should be added. If you want a feature added to a software system, the onus is on you to show that it is actually required.

Yes we do. Happier users, more sales. If MS is so afraid of corrupting our minds with this feature, they could make it a configuration option that defaults to disabled, so only us, already lost and uncurable souls will be affected.

Should MS ever get around to expanding on WP8's feature-set and design principles, and fix the design-flaws that they know exist, then this issue will quickly be forgotten. Users will be even happier, because instead of getting a close-feature that excels a coating app-turds with gold, we'd actually get better apps.

 

[OzRob]

The fact that thousands of software project achieved that "state of grace" over the last two decades (including WP7) leads me to believe it isn't quite that miraculous.

So are you saying that WP7 has no bugs that could cause app execution to freeze or go bad? And is WP7 so perfect that a developer can't write an app that crashes and needs to be closed? If that's your argument then I'm not buying it.

The lack of a close-feature tells us something about the OS. It tells us "you mustn't worry about this".

If that's what it's telling us, then it's lying. There are apps on WP8 right now that suck battery like noone's business when "paused" in the background. And ffs it's a phone operating system, not my mother, so I really don't appreciate it telling me "not to worry about it dear, the OS knows best".

That is in itself valuable information, and many people appreciate not having to do so. Consider also how very few people are willing to ever learn anything about the operating systems they use, other than what they manage to discern through the UI, and how that makes the UI's ability to convey such information all the more valuable.

Adding a close-feature amounts to WP making a false statement about itself. Not only is it misinformation, but it encourages users to engage in useless behaviour, as we don't gain anything by manually managing app lifecycles (with the exception of dealing with design-flaws, which should be dealt with by the design department, not outsourced to the task management department).

mmm...we're talking about grownup human beings using these phones, not four year old kids. Allowing us close an app easily if we want to is hardly going to undermine the foundations of Windows Phone life as we know it. I mean WP ALREADY HAS a way of closing apps - it's just not well executed. If we, as users (and therefore buyers) of Windows Phones, can't be trusted enough not to abuse the power the OS bestows upon us, then why allow us to close apps at all?

There are a few other reasons of a more technical nature, basically revolving around how such a close-feature complicates app development, but I'll skip those for now.

Yes, that might ruin some perfectly good condescension.

 

[a5cent]

So are you saying that WP7 has no bugs that could cause app execution to freeze or go bad? And is WP7 so perfect that a developer can't write an app that crashes and needs to be closed? If that's your argument then I'm not buying it.

I'm not saying it can't be done. If we wanted to crash and hang a WP7 app, then we as developers could probably find a way to do that, sure. My point is that WP7 was reliable and robust enough that it never happened in practice. You could heat a device up to 70?C and cause the entire system to crash, but I never heard of a single app crashing without the OS successfully disposing of it. WP7 was based on a real-time kernel intended for use in industrial applications that must run 24/7 with no down-time, ever. If you don't believe that is possible, then don't ever think about the extremely complicated software landing our planes, monitoring our nuclear power plants or controlling our medical equipment.

mmm...we're talking about grownup human beings using these phones, not four year old kids.

I realize that you and most people on this forum don't need the UI to tell you how the OS is meant to be used. However, the overwhelming majority of people do appreciate that support and are happy about every technicality that doesn't bubble up to the surface. IMHO WP should be developed for the majority.

Yes, that might ruin some perfectly good condescension.

What are you talking about? I'm just trying to explain my view. IMHO that is less condescending than saying "I want it so f*** everything/everyone else".

 

[11B1P]

Why is there no option to close apps in the multitasking menu? This is another tweak that many users have been requesting. Whether you tap a cross or you can swipe them away, the ability to close running apps from this menu would be good. No one wants to have to go into the app in order to close it.

As stated time and again, in WP, it is not necessary to close the app. This is different than ios or android. Apps in the background do not impact your battery life, data or anything else. Hit the windows button and drive on.

 

[a5cent]

As stated time and again, in WP, it is not necessary to close the app. This is different than ios or android. Apps in the background do not impact your battery life, data or anything else. Hit the windows button and drive on.

Unfortunately, some apps do exist that can negatively impact your battery life despite being "suspended" in the background. DirectX games appear to be the most common offenders (I had my first such encounter just recently). I'm hoping to profile a few of those apps and find out what exactly is going on, but so far I haven't found the time to make that attempt. I don't know what the problem is, but I can't imagine how this behavior isn't an OS bug.

Anyone using such an app just needs to tap the hardware back button two or three times as soon as they're done. That closes the app immediately and ensures it never gets the chance to cause unnecessary battery drain.

Sad but true.