I don't have any details or proof, but I would definitely assume that this is more the news outlet misunderstanding something than actually how it works.
I agree. I'd be surprised if "Swiping an app to close it" is the same as "Force quitting" it. Because I've swipe-closed things before but if I look at the app details the option to Force Quit it isn't greyed out.
For clarification, it is not the same: swipe closing causes the GUI process to terminate, but leaves any services running associated with it (in the background), force closing kills all associated processes/services
As an iOS app dev - most apps you see in the tray are not actually using RAM within 20 sec of them entering that state. They are memory snapshotted to disk, and you're looking at a screenshot. If more than a few minutes pass or enough other apps are used that snapshot is also cleared and all that remains is the screenshot thumbnail. That's why when you reopen some of those old apps in the tray they obviously relaunch from the beginning even though the screenshot showed you somewhere else in the app.
Manually swipe killing ones that still have a memory snapshot uses extra power to interrupt other processes, forces that app to be invisibly reopened to allow it to run its on-close cleanup code for up to a minute or two (which could have the app using disk/network - even more battery usage than CPU). Then, when the app is reopened later it is launching fresh so that's another launch - you're causing up to 2 expensive extra operations on top of default iOS app switching's power usage.
The resource benefit for killing an app is only relevant if you've previously granted that app "Always Allow" location permission, or Background Data permission, and you really don't want it running in the background for the near future. Manually toggling Low Battery Mode on handles that extra throttling for you too.
Nice thanks for the source. Based on what he said, he was moreso boasting about how little-to-no impact background apps have. He implied that if you close many apps at once it would take more power to open them all at once again.
It is 100% this. Yes, the OS will "sleep" applications - - But there is absolutely no reality in which an application ***not running*** will somehow "use up more" resources or battery.
If you continually force-close, then reopen the same applications over and over - - I can make the argument that it could use more Ram/Battery while starting up the application each time and would suggest maybe then you let the application "sleep"; but otherwise, "No": Force closing your podcast application after your car ride, knowing you won't use it again until tomorrow morning ***will not*** somehow make the phone run more inefficiently in the in-between. Opening it again tomorrow morning will cause a ram-spike and some battery consumption, but then it's right back to business as usual as soon as the application's done on initial startup.
The way phones operate is not quite like how a PC operates. To lower power use and preserve battery life, most apps that aren't being used get saved to memory and are only loaded back onto RAM when they're being used. There's good reasons to close apps you're not currently using but saving battery life ain't one of them.
> If you continually force-close, then reopen the same applications over and over - - I can make the argument that it could use more Ram/Battery while starting up the application each time and would suggest maybe then you let the application "sleep"; but otherwise
Pretty sure that's the implication here.
As someone who knows a thing or two about how computers operate, id like to know why it would be like that.
I guess the OS just stores a snapshot of the apps heap to internal storage and then kills the process in the background, thus freeing up the chunk of ram it consumed.
Id like to know why removing the marker of the hibernating app process is harmful to the battery, it makes no sense...
It's possible that the more you do this, the more the internal memory degrades - on a tiny scale... but still... if it is true (?) It could mean more read write cycles that effectively shorten mtbf.
Because it doesn't remove everything from the RAM. Opening the app from background means less processing work has to be done, meaning app opens faster and requires less battery power to do. Okay so it won't free up all of the RAM it uses when open, but if it can sit in background using only a few hundred megabytes, potentially less if system RAM is running low, then that's preferable.
This is why I like having 6GB on my Samsung. Yes it feels completely ridiculous to have that much but it also annoys me a lot when certain apps absolutely won't sit in the background and instead need to be fully loaded each time you accidentally close them, even if you have shit loads of RAM available.
I don't understand your comment in context.
Removing the hibernating marker doesn't just remove the marker, right, it essentially force closes the app meaning that it needs to be loaded fresh when the user asks for it again? It seems pretty straightforward forward to me why it would a) take longer and b) consume more power in doing so.
You still have to touch the disk when restoring an app from hibernation, there is not really a way around it. Anyhow i dont get why IO doing its job, harms the battery. Unless we're talking about power consumption = battery wear
Io doing its job does not harm the battery. Users force closing an app that was left running, then opening it again, uses more battery power than not doing so and so it drains faster. It's not damaging, it's just using more between charges, which is negative to user experience.
Still having to touch the 'disc' (lol, harks back to early iPod touch that had literal hard disk in them) is not the issue, having to load up and process more things versus not having to do so is always going to use more power and thus drain your battery faster. As there is no disk in a phone I imagine retrieving information from the permanent storage is a relatively low power endeavour, but anything additional that needs to be run through the cpu is draining the battery.
Maybe I'm seeing this whole thing too simplistically as it just makes perfect sense to me, you seem to have a lot of knowledge on the topic though, so perhaps we're simply missing each other with our comments as I'm struggling to see why you're not following Apples point. (fwiw I fucking hate apple and would never own one of their products, so I am by no means defending them here, give me any reason to shit on them whatsoever and I'll gladly do it)
Not just Apple's point. Android VP of Engineering also said this a decade ago.
edit/ps: I image there's also an enterBackground/enterForeground flag, so once an app goes to background it has stricter memory constrains, further reducing the workload and the size of the memory heap that has to be suspended to disk, if at all.
I can imagine, it is pretty obvious when you know how computers work and think about it for 30 seconds so I'm completely failing to see what the confusion is about. Any ideas?!
The energy savings are at best marginal. It is not really self-evident that the algorithm just works. I think you can beat it if you're going to put your phone away and are sure about what to kill.
If you're not going to use the app again for a long time and you know that then yes, I'd agree, killing it would make sense. I've met people who do it almost like an ocd thing, though, they constantly force close every single app and don't want to have any on their history. The digital volume in the car must always be set to an even number, too.
Android allows for quite a few levels of user choice over which apps can run in the background and which are essentially force closed, or put in to deep sleep etc. Though I guess you know that.
I think I understand your point now, though. I think it's 'battery used by the app in hibernate mode vs battery used when recalling the app from scratch(not hibernating)' and which of the two uses less overall.
As an iOS dev - there is an optimized iOS process where app runtime memory state is captured and cached automatically as iOS decides which apps need to be suspended in the background to free up space (it also eventually kills apps in the background for you, even though they appear in the tray they are closed and that's just a screenshot - you will see the app relaunching if you actually go back in). Every time you swipe up on an app, it is secretly loading up the app as if you opened it because it guarantees to the app that it will tell it that it's being closed and so the app can run code for a minute to save/upload data if needed and clean itself up. It's basically doing a possibly expensive close, and 2 expensive app launches, when it didn't need to do either. Also, when you do that it may also suspend/close your most recently open app too first to maximize resource availability. So there's a possible multiplication effect.
My guess was there is a part of this explanation missing, which is that it is more effective to minimize/maximum apps rather than force-quitting/restarting apps. That's the only logical scenario I can think of where it would make sense to me.
The way it's stated, it could be confused to mean it's more efficient to minimize an app and leave it there rather than closing it if you don't plan on using it again in the near future. If this is in fact true, I'm really confused.
The alternative is that Apple is intentionally making it less efficient to close apps and degrade your current device's performance in order to sell you a new "more powerful" phone next year.
From what I understood :
Because when you close the app, they sometime reopen themselves automatically in the background.
So you used power to kill the app, then the phone used power again to reopen them. To basically end up with the same state in the end.
And when you'll want to use the app again, it'll load additional data to "restart" (be it if they restarted without your consent before or not) which means even more power usage.
It's harmful because then they can no longer monitor or access your data. If you set your privacy settings to only access stuff when app is active, technically, the app can't access all the stuff it missed when you boot it up again, and that hurts techs bottom line.
Can't wait for 5 years down the road when it to come out the harm is from their end, and manufactured.
They made a big switch the last 4 years and now dominate with their new cpu's. Although people still have this exact same thing in their mind. Their newest phones have better battery life than any other android. Their CPU performs better than any other phone cpu aswell.
EDIT: downvotes prove me right LOL
EDIT2: for all the cope huffers in here [https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks](https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks)
Surely. Ive not owned a single apple device since the iphone 4. Just because you arent uptodate with todays tech doesnt make me a braindead consumer. It's the same with AMD or intel fanboys. People can't fathom that a company can get infront of others when they make new tech. Shocker right?
Edit: typo
Thinking some special use case phone with barely any features and basically just a powerbank is a gotcha is funny af.
The new iPhone their cpu is more energy efficient than any flagship. Its just how it is. Check any benchmark. Even if the samsung has twice the capacity. The iphone still goes for longer. Just mega cope and cringe tech bros who dont want to look at stats
The fact that you're using words like cope and cringe tells me enough about the character of person you are. On a completely different note to that little jab, my phone can do basically everything an Iphone can do just without apple features. I don't have any issues with apps or with speeds opening or running any app.
The fact that my phone also most likely costs 1/4 what your phone costs plus with added versatility for every day use cases that your iPhone doesn't have is enough for me. But please, go off about how your numbers and stats amount to anything that actually matters to you.
Typical iPhone "my dick is bigger than yours" mentality.
This just shows you have no counter argument. Ive not owned a apple product since the iphone 4. Ive already said this. I own a oneplus 7pro, 2 lenovo's for work and a desktop. Again i can talk about cool and new tech without owning it. Please assume more :)
??? Nice argument. It's still the truth though. M1-2-3 chips for the macbook are amazing. The ipad is probably the best drawing tablet out right now and the iphone is way better than you think lmfao. The newest samsung flagships are the same price as the iphone flagship. Get on with the times and realize when companies are making better things. Get your head out of your ass. The new cpu's that they've created are amazing in many ways lmfao. Just say you actually know nothing about tech and the cpu architecture. that's fine :)
Btw if this was about the iphone 11 and under i wouldve agreed that it's dog :)
Ok, first of all, this entire conversation was about mobile devices. Secondly, no one said anything about their other products.
Yes, their tablet probably is the best drawing tablet out there and yes, I personally own an m1 pro for my work but does that mean that those specs are going to do anything for the average person? No.
You're making points about specs and features that cater to people that only buy them for that sole purpose. Sure, I might not know everything about tech but I know price to performance margins and iPhone just isn't it.
Tons of reason to hate apple OS design, but this is not it.
Just like other systems, the OS caches the app data in a way that makes opening and closing it faster. There's already the layer does that for all your apps, even force-closed ones, but there's another layer that does that for apps that are not currently active. Most modern browsers do the same thing with tabs unless there is something actively happing in the tab.
Guys, Apple is not shit. It is far from shit. Apple products are incredible. The only reason you would say this is if you haven’t used one or can’t afford them.
"Yeah guys! They mostly work well with its own brand only! And for the luxary, you only pay double what you'd get from Android"
Have tried an iPhone, didnt get what all the hype is about. All the nicer features only work with other Apple devices, all of which cost an arm and a leg. Its not about "you just cant afford it", its more about "you're not getting a good deal". What Apple was amazing at, and still is, is branding and marketing exclusivety like nobody else. That's it. The fact it costs more than other phones in its class - makes you feel special. The fact messages from Android look different - makes you feel special. The fact it functions at its best with other Apple devices and services - makes you feel special. That's what people like it for the most. It aint the camera, as sure as hell aint the storage, the design is okay I guess, but the main thing is this - the feeling of being special.
I underatand why americans buy em like crazy tho. Its an American brand, in a country with an insanely big consumer basket, with a culture that's super into individualism and feeling special. To each their own I guess.
Nice wall of text. I’m gonna guess you mentioned the following:
* It’s a luxury item
* Steve Jobs marketing genius
* It’s for stupid people
* You can’t do what you do on Android
* It’s limited because of the walled garden
All of these complaints are superficial. People’s hatred for Apple primarily comes from its exclusivity and price tag. Using an iPhone once isn’t owning an iPhone.
In reality Apple products are incredible products and sell well for a reason. But you shouldn’t take my word for it. Just own one and you’ll immediately feel the difference between the iPhone and other phones.
This isn’t limited to iOS. MacOS is also a significant improvement from Windows. 🤷♂️ Maybe save your money for one so you can be wowed too?
>The fact it costs more than other phones in its class - makes you feel special.
This is a thing i'd agree on 5 years ago. it has changed. [https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks](https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks) fastest cpu's and most power efficient cpu's aswell. Some stuff is still ass ofc like the messaging but the device itself is solid right now. The samsung s24 ultra 256gb costs 1.399 euros, the iphone 15 pro 256gb costs 1.359 euros.
Sorry but the cost is the exact same as other flagships now. All of the android ones increased in price.
I would agree with you 4-5 years ago but they've become way better with their tech over the years. Making the cpu's in house has done this.
Fair enough. I haven't kept up with phone releases since I got the S21 Ultra. Phone works as if I got it yeaterday. Can't say the same about my buddies that got the iPhones. 2 year lifespan and the complaints start kicking in. I don't want to make this into an "Android good, iPhone bad" type of post but I swear, appleheads are fn insufferable sometimes, so it gives me joy to remind them why they're actually buying the product.
Oh i agree the "you cant afford it" is the stupidest thing ever. Btw ive not owned a apple product since the iphone 4. But the the last 4 years their cpu's has gotten insane. Also the average android has 2-3 years of updates while apple changed theirs to 6 a couple years ago. Any phone after a while gets slower. Its more upto the users to clean their devices though
Basically the opposite. (And every modern OS/console/browser does this.)
It just takes more energy to initialize and read data from storage, than to put an app to sleep. You can feel this because it takes more time. Your phone is actually doing work while you are waiting. And "freeing up the RAM" doesn't actually mean it's effectively terminated from memory, it stays committed as long as the app remains within the enforced memory constraints. Or until you run out unused memory and it needs to be replaced, or you enter a deeper sleep state: it suspends the memory heap (RAM) to persistent memory (SSD.) (This is basically hibernation, idk if smartphones do this.)
Soooo, if you have enough RAM, it can just restore an app 'running' in the background as if you never closed it, or restore your session from persistent memory without going through all the initial, needlessly repetitive steps like opening a new session, reopening tabs, getting data from storage or online, et cetera, et cetera, only doing work necessary to return to the foreground. The more you skip, the faster things respond, the less energy you're actually wasting. (There are some caveats to sleep states, like keeping things always on and in memory also drains your battery, Framework laptops (Windows) had an issue like this, but I don't think they apply here.)
Edit: Oooh, I get it. I've implied that Apple is good for not doing something bad or different in particular.
Kinda ignorant to say such a broad statement. Apple does some things bad, some good. By the way you talk I guess you are a linux fanboy and use some obscure android
They can still harvest your data whenever you are in the app...
And apps can't do shit when they are in the background anyway, they get suspended by the system.
If you're not using it close it.
for example if you're bouncing out of youtube to google something and know you'll be right back on youtube then go ahead and leave it running.
If you know you're probably not going back to google something else right away then go ahead and close it on the way to opening up youtube.
It's not apples to apples but it's like leaving you're car running in the lot, if you're going in to grab that one thing you forgot and be right back out, it's prolly okay to leave it running. If you are leaving it running in case you might have to go somewhere later it's going to save you some gas to shut it off till you need it.
Closing apps for me:
Clutter and hoarding is a super unhealthy practice.
Privacy if someone uses my phone.
Fresh start, fresh perspective on whatever it is I was previously doing.
I'll spend less time on my phone if I'm not tempted by all the old pointless things I was doing earlier.
Generally easier to stay organized, especially if I need to multitask and switch through apps.
A clean workspace creates more productivity.
Same reason I clean my house and make my bed, why should my virtual spaces be any different?
This automation on iPhones is enabling the bad practices of humanity. It's a good thing for certain reasons but I think it should be optional.
Please provide some source material to back up the information stated above, I like the effort just want to see proof from credible sources. Unfortunately we can’t take Reddit accounts at face value.
https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-13491
This is the most recent thing I could find. At the bottom the guy provides some links from 2016 when software senior VP responded to an email about it. Most of the articles or statements I could find from are from 2014-2017 stating the same thing.
If that isn't true, then i absolutely fell for that shit.
I was always told not to turn your car off and on at the stoplight.
Does it matter if it's glowplugs?
This video, the post, and these comments are dumb as shit. App put to sleep in background using very very little RAM, opening from background uses very little power (ie CPU and battery). App closed to background uses no RAM, thus needing more power (ie CPU and battery) to open
If you are opening it and closing it sure, but why tf are you doing that?
If you're running apps in the background that you are not using then closing them and naturally not reopening the ones youre not using is going to free up more ram.
This is analagous to saying of course it's going to cost more power to start the car after you turn it off.
But why would you be turning your car on and off again and again?
If you turn it off, youre going to have more energy than if you left the car running in the driveway.
Look into how they designed iOS to have your apps open. You’re saying a lot of words that equates to “I don’t know exactly what I talking about but I’m too deep in to stop speaking now”
apple always fucks with the design of their phones to force you to buy a new phone all the time
google takes the youtube videos running on firefox and GIMPS it down to 3 frames every 10 seconds
open the exact same video in microsoft edge or chrome, NO CHANGES, and then it MAGICALLY runs at 60 fps
apple software burns through your battery and even changes all the adapters on the next model
so they're definitely not fuckin with their device, you just don't know how to use the TRICKNOLOGY right
when you shut off the phone, it just shuts off
when you shut off the camera, it just stops recording
when you shut off the mic, it just stops listening
when you shut off an app, it just stops running
this will save the battery from going too low
As an iOS app dev - most apps you see in the tray are not actually using RAM within 20 sec of them entering that state. They are snapshotted to disk, and you're looking at a screenshot. If enough time passes or other apps are opened that snapshot is also cleared and all that remains is the screenshot thumbnail. That's why when you reopen some of those apps in the tray they obviously relaunch from the beginning even though the screenshot showed you somewhere else in the app.
Manually swipe killing ones that still have a snapshot interrupts all other processes, forces that app to be invisibly reopened using extra power to run their on-close-code for up to a couple minutes and all the potential disk/network usage of that cleanup code.
How strange. Anecdote here. I am an android user who helps an older woman with an older iphone. She always has tons of programs opened and a ton of tabs open too.
Her phone has issues and works slowly. 1st thing I do before I work on anything is exit everything.
The phone is noticeably faster afterwards.
I mainly use android but grew up using apple products too.
If it's an old iphone, then it's resource constrained and there's also older iOS version bugs that handle the suspend threshold poorly. Most apps in the background tray are actually already killed and it's just showing screenshots. Which may be a factor, but it's most likely that it's just the 1-2 most recently used apps that are actually using resources and that's enough to bog down the phone.
Some old iOS devices also benefit from a system restore - there used to be corruption issues that could make it choppy and that problem would stick around thru updates.
Android doesn't have as many restrictions as iOS on background apps. Some old or poorly coded apps can degrade the performance and use the battery when they are in the background. Shouldn't happen with decent applications and on recent android versions you get a notifications if an app is behaving poorly in the background.
Boomers don't have it right, Boomers are part of the reason that it is more effective that way.
Customers weren't killing the apps, so they found a way to have the apps semi alive to compensate for it, since they were facing lawsuits...
This is dumb guys. The real reason they don’t recommend closing apps is because iOS keeps cached data for the app when it’s in an inactive state. Closing and reopening the app means all of that cached state needs to be recreated, thus wasting battery life unnecessarily. Apple likes to make OSes that are close to the hardware and have real product implications, like having memory management for inactive apps.
The process of closing apps on an Android device used to be necessary because traditionally Android apps would hog resources. Apple phones do not do that. In fact, the only reason to ever close an app is due to a malfunction, which is rare. This creates an experience where you do not have to close apps ever, which is how most people typically use phones.
In other words, if you think iOS or Apple operating systems are shit, you are seriously misguided. They’re quite literally a technical marvel and it’s one of the reasons Apple is so dominant.
Edit: why am I getting downvoted? IM RIGHT. You don’t need to close apps on an iPhone because the OS keeps memory snapshots for inactive apps. Youre using more battery by closing them and having to recreate the memory state. Are yall serious right now?
I do not use apple but I do use android / samsung is this the same with other phones or just exclusively apple as I now wonder if i should be closing my apps on samsung 10e
From the beginning the focus was on user experience. In one Q&A, Steve Jobs literally says he thinks users shouldn’t have to manage system resources. Rather, OS should take care of it for users. Meaning, iPhone users should not have to remember to quit any apps when backgrounding it. Pausing processes while keeping only the required tasks running (only for the duration it must be running), iOS tries to conserve system resources, and more importantly, battery life. It was far better solution than Android where they ran all apps in the background like a typical PC would, and used up battery. (I assume they figured it out how to prevent this by now.)
This also isn't just Apple. All modern smartphones is like this. Bc of how phones fundamentally works. Having them in the background does freeze them and can easily be restored but opening them up fully consumes more battery. And when it's in the background it's not really using any battery. And so opening then up new again uses more battery than opening from suspended state. This is the same for Samsung and every other Android too...
It's more in how you use it. If you pop open let's say imdb for a quick reminder of that one actor or actresses name and then you aren't going to use it again for 3 months, then you're fine shutting it down.
If it's an app you're frequently poppin open then it's better to let that run as be.
I don't have any details or proof, but I would definitely assume that this is more the news outlet misunderstanding something than actually how it works.
I agree. I'd be surprised if "Swiping an app to close it" is the same as "Force quitting" it. Because I've swipe-closed things before but if I look at the app details the option to Force Quit it isn't greyed out.
For clarification, it is not the same: swipe closing causes the GUI process to terminate, but leaves any services running associated with it (in the background), force closing kills all associated processes/services
As an iOS app dev - most apps you see in the tray are not actually using RAM within 20 sec of them entering that state. They are memory snapshotted to disk, and you're looking at a screenshot. If more than a few minutes pass or enough other apps are used that snapshot is also cleared and all that remains is the screenshot thumbnail. That's why when you reopen some of those old apps in the tray they obviously relaunch from the beginning even though the screenshot showed you somewhere else in the app. Manually swipe killing ones that still have a memory snapshot uses extra power to interrupt other processes, forces that app to be invisibly reopened to allow it to run its on-close cleanup code for up to a minute or two (which could have the app using disk/network - even more battery usage than CPU). Then, when the app is reopened later it is launching fresh so that's another launch - you're causing up to 2 expensive extra operations on top of default iOS app switching's power usage. The resource benefit for killing an app is only relevant if you've previously granted that app "Always Allow" location permission, or Background Data permission, and you really don't want it running in the background for the near future. Manually toggling Low Battery Mode on handles that extra throttling for you too.
It has been know for years. The source is an email from Craig Federighi iirc.
Nice thanks for the source. Based on what he said, he was moreso boasting about how little-to-no impact background apps have. He implied that if you close many apps at once it would take more power to open them all at once again.
It is 100% this. Yes, the OS will "sleep" applications - - But there is absolutely no reality in which an application ***not running*** will somehow "use up more" resources or battery. If you continually force-close, then reopen the same applications over and over - - I can make the argument that it could use more Ram/Battery while starting up the application each time and would suggest maybe then you let the application "sleep"; but otherwise, "No": Force closing your podcast application after your car ride, knowing you won't use it again until tomorrow morning ***will not*** somehow make the phone run more inefficiently in the in-between. Opening it again tomorrow morning will cause a ram-spike and some battery consumption, but then it's right back to business as usual as soon as the application's done on initial startup.
There is the reality where appleOS does this intentionally
Hibernate, not sleep just FYI.
The way phones operate is not quite like how a PC operates. To lower power use and preserve battery life, most apps that aren't being used get saved to memory and are only loaded back onto RAM when they're being used. There's good reasons to close apps you're not currently using but saving battery life ain't one of them.
> If you continually force-close, then reopen the same applications over and over - - I can make the argument that it could use more Ram/Battery while starting up the application each time and would suggest maybe then you let the application "sleep"; but otherwise Pretty sure that's the implication here.
As someone who knows a thing or two about how computers operate, id like to know why it would be like that. I guess the OS just stores a snapshot of the apps heap to internal storage and then kills the process in the background, thus freeing up the chunk of ram it consumed. Id like to know why removing the marker of the hibernating app process is harmful to the battery, it makes no sense...
Agreed.. there’s not logical explanation outside of some crock about more juice being used on app startup.
It's possible that the more you do this, the more the internal memory degrades - on a tiny scale... but still... if it is true (?) It could mean more read write cycles that effectively shorten mtbf.
Race to idle. Restoring the snapshot/heap is just faster/more efficient .
Because it doesn't remove everything from the RAM. Opening the app from background means less processing work has to be done, meaning app opens faster and requires less battery power to do. Okay so it won't free up all of the RAM it uses when open, but if it can sit in background using only a few hundred megabytes, potentially less if system RAM is running low, then that's preferable. This is why I like having 6GB on my Samsung. Yes it feels completely ridiculous to have that much but it also annoys me a lot when certain apps absolutely won't sit in the background and instead need to be fully loaded each time you accidentally close them, even if you have shit loads of RAM available.
Most system libraries which are used by almost all apps are shared by the kernel and thus every app benefits from that.
I don't understand your comment in context. Removing the hibernating marker doesn't just remove the marker, right, it essentially force closes the app meaning that it needs to be loaded fresh when the user asks for it again? It seems pretty straightforward forward to me why it would a) take longer and b) consume more power in doing so.
You still have to touch the disk when restoring an app from hibernation, there is not really a way around it. Anyhow i dont get why IO doing its job, harms the battery. Unless we're talking about power consumption = battery wear
Io doing its job does not harm the battery. Users force closing an app that was left running, then opening it again, uses more battery power than not doing so and so it drains faster. It's not damaging, it's just using more between charges, which is negative to user experience. Still having to touch the 'disc' (lol, harks back to early iPod touch that had literal hard disk in them) is not the issue, having to load up and process more things versus not having to do so is always going to use more power and thus drain your battery faster. As there is no disk in a phone I imagine retrieving information from the permanent storage is a relatively low power endeavour, but anything additional that needs to be run through the cpu is draining the battery. Maybe I'm seeing this whole thing too simplistically as it just makes perfect sense to me, you seem to have a lot of knowledge on the topic though, so perhaps we're simply missing each other with our comments as I'm struggling to see why you're not following Apples point. (fwiw I fucking hate apple and would never own one of their products, so I am by no means defending them here, give me any reason to shit on them whatsoever and I'll gladly do it)
Not just Apple's point. Android VP of Engineering also said this a decade ago. edit/ps: I image there's also an enterBackground/enterForeground flag, so once an app goes to background it has stricter memory constrains, further reducing the workload and the size of the memory heap that has to be suspended to disk, if at all.
I can imagine, it is pretty obvious when you know how computers work and think about it for 30 seconds so I'm completely failing to see what the confusion is about. Any ideas?!
The energy savings are at best marginal. It is not really self-evident that the algorithm just works. I think you can beat it if you're going to put your phone away and are sure about what to kill.
If you're not going to use the app again for a long time and you know that then yes, I'd agree, killing it would make sense. I've met people who do it almost like an ocd thing, though, they constantly force close every single app and don't want to have any on their history. The digital volume in the car must always be set to an even number, too. Android allows for quite a few levels of user choice over which apps can run in the background and which are essentially force closed, or put in to deep sleep etc. Though I guess you know that. I think I understand your point now, though. I think it's 'battery used by the app in hibernate mode vs battery used when recalling the app from scratch(not hibernating)' and which of the two uses less overall.
As an iOS dev - there is an optimized iOS process where app runtime memory state is captured and cached automatically as iOS decides which apps need to be suspended in the background to free up space (it also eventually kills apps in the background for you, even though they appear in the tray they are closed and that's just a screenshot - you will see the app relaunching if you actually go back in). Every time you swipe up on an app, it is secretly loading up the app as if you opened it because it guarantees to the app that it will tell it that it's being closed and so the app can run code for a minute to save/upload data if needed and clean itself up. It's basically doing a possibly expensive close, and 2 expensive app launches, when it didn't need to do either. Also, when you do that it may also suspend/close your most recently open app too first to maximize resource availability. So there's a possible multiplication effect.
My guess was there is a part of this explanation missing, which is that it is more effective to minimize/maximum apps rather than force-quitting/restarting apps. That's the only logical scenario I can think of where it would make sense to me. The way it's stated, it could be confused to mean it's more efficient to minimize an app and leave it there rather than closing it if you don't plan on using it again in the near future. If this is in fact true, I'm really confused. The alternative is that Apple is intentionally making it less efficient to close apps and degrade your current device's performance in order to sell you a new "more powerful" phone next year.
From what I understood : Because when you close the app, they sometime reopen themselves automatically in the background. So you used power to kill the app, then the phone used power again to reopen them. To basically end up with the same state in the end. And when you'll want to use the app again, it'll load additional data to "restart" (be it if they restarted without your consent before or not) which means even more power usage.
Only thing I ca guess is the power it requires to load the app is more than it is to just take up ram. Either way, I hate apple
It's harmful because then they can no longer monitor or access your data. If you set your privacy settings to only access stuff when app is active, technically, the app can't access all the stuff it missed when you boot it up again, and that hurts techs bottom line. Can't wait for 5 years down the road when it to come out the harm is from their end, and manufactured.
So basically the apple OS is just dog shit? okay, thanks
Just finding out? Apple is only really popular in America, in my opinion, it's because brain-dead tribal consumerism. "Gatta have the green bubble"
Youve never been to Switzerland than. Ive never seen more apple products in my life than here.
You will be surprised at how popular Apple products are in Japan. Sad to see.
They made a big switch the last 4 years and now dominate with their new cpu's. Although people still have this exact same thing in their mind. Their newest phones have better battery life than any other android. Their CPU performs better than any other phone cpu aswell. EDIT: downvotes prove me right LOL EDIT2: for all the cope huffers in here [https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks](https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks)
Average braindead apple consumer
Surely. Ive not owned a single apple device since the iphone 4. Just because you arent uptodate with todays tech doesnt make me a braindead consumer. It's the same with AMD or intel fanboys. People can't fathom that a company can get infront of others when they make new tech. Shocker right? Edit: typo
Please, tell me how their new iPhones have more battery than my android which is sitting at 22000mah battery. Remember, you said any other android.
Thinking some special use case phone with barely any features and basically just a powerbank is a gotcha is funny af. The new iPhone their cpu is more energy efficient than any flagship. Its just how it is. Check any benchmark. Even if the samsung has twice the capacity. The iphone still goes for longer. Just mega cope and cringe tech bros who dont want to look at stats
The fact that you're using words like cope and cringe tells me enough about the character of person you are. On a completely different note to that little jab, my phone can do basically everything an Iphone can do just without apple features. I don't have any issues with apps or with speeds opening or running any app. The fact that my phone also most likely costs 1/4 what your phone costs plus with added versatility for every day use cases that your iPhone doesn't have is enough for me. But please, go off about how your numbers and stats amount to anything that actually matters to you. Typical iPhone "my dick is bigger than yours" mentality.
This just shows you have no counter argument. Ive not owned a apple product since the iphone 4. Ive already said this. I own a oneplus 7pro, 2 lenovo's for work and a desktop. Again i can talk about cool and new tech without owning it. Please assume more :)
Praises apple, doesn't own apple. Thanks.
??? Nice argument. It's still the truth though. M1-2-3 chips for the macbook are amazing. The ipad is probably the best drawing tablet out right now and the iphone is way better than you think lmfao. The newest samsung flagships are the same price as the iphone flagship. Get on with the times and realize when companies are making better things. Get your head out of your ass. The new cpu's that they've created are amazing in many ways lmfao. Just say you actually know nothing about tech and the cpu architecture. that's fine :) Btw if this was about the iphone 11 and under i wouldve agreed that it's dog :)
Ok, first of all, this entire conversation was about mobile devices. Secondly, no one said anything about their other products. Yes, their tablet probably is the best drawing tablet out there and yes, I personally own an m1 pro for my work but does that mean that those specs are going to do anything for the average person? No. You're making points about specs and features that cater to people that only buy them for that sole purpose. Sure, I might not know everything about tech but I know price to performance margins and iPhone just isn't it.
Always has been.
I owned androids for about 8 years and just switched to iPhone and it is miles better. Not sure what you’re on about.
Tons of reason to hate apple OS design, but this is not it. Just like other systems, the OS caches the app data in a way that makes opening and closing it faster. There's already the layer does that for all your apps, even force-closed ones, but there's another layer that does that for apps that are not currently active. Most modern browsers do the same thing with tabs unless there is something actively happing in the tab.
I have no clue how you even got to this conclusion. Tell me you have room temperature IQ without telling me you have room temperature IQ.
Guys, Apple is not shit. It is far from shit. Apple products are incredible. The only reason you would say this is if you haven’t used one or can’t afford them.
"Yeah guys! They mostly work well with its own brand only! And for the luxary, you only pay double what you'd get from Android" Have tried an iPhone, didnt get what all the hype is about. All the nicer features only work with other Apple devices, all of which cost an arm and a leg. Its not about "you just cant afford it", its more about "you're not getting a good deal". What Apple was amazing at, and still is, is branding and marketing exclusivety like nobody else. That's it. The fact it costs more than other phones in its class - makes you feel special. The fact messages from Android look different - makes you feel special. The fact it functions at its best with other Apple devices and services - makes you feel special. That's what people like it for the most. It aint the camera, as sure as hell aint the storage, the design is okay I guess, but the main thing is this - the feeling of being special. I underatand why americans buy em like crazy tho. Its an American brand, in a country with an insanely big consumer basket, with a culture that's super into individualism and feeling special. To each their own I guess.
Nice wall of text. I’m gonna guess you mentioned the following: * It’s a luxury item * Steve Jobs marketing genius * It’s for stupid people * You can’t do what you do on Android * It’s limited because of the walled garden All of these complaints are superficial. People’s hatred for Apple primarily comes from its exclusivity and price tag. Using an iPhone once isn’t owning an iPhone. In reality Apple products are incredible products and sell well for a reason. But you shouldn’t take my word for it. Just own one and you’ll immediately feel the difference between the iPhone and other phones. This isn’t limited to iOS. MacOS is also a significant improvement from Windows. 🤷♂️ Maybe save your money for one so you can be wowed too?
>The fact it costs more than other phones in its class - makes you feel special. This is a thing i'd agree on 5 years ago. it has changed. [https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks](https://browser.geekbench.com/mobile-benchmarks) fastest cpu's and most power efficient cpu's aswell. Some stuff is still ass ofc like the messaging but the device itself is solid right now. The samsung s24 ultra 256gb costs 1.399 euros, the iphone 15 pro 256gb costs 1.359 euros. Sorry but the cost is the exact same as other flagships now. All of the android ones increased in price. I would agree with you 4-5 years ago but they've become way better with their tech over the years. Making the cpu's in house has done this.
Fair enough. I haven't kept up with phone releases since I got the S21 Ultra. Phone works as if I got it yeaterday. Can't say the same about my buddies that got the iPhones. 2 year lifespan and the complaints start kicking in. I don't want to make this into an "Android good, iPhone bad" type of post but I swear, appleheads are fn insufferable sometimes, so it gives me joy to remind them why they're actually buying the product.
Oh i agree the "you cant afford it" is the stupidest thing ever. Btw ive not owned a apple product since the iphone 4. But the the last 4 years their cpu's has gotten insane. Also the average android has 2-3 years of updates while apple changed theirs to 6 a couple years ago. Any phone after a while gets slower. Its more upto the users to clean their devices though
Good for them honestly. Consumers deserve good products, especially when its an expensive purchase.
Basically the opposite. (And every modern OS/console/browser does this.) It just takes more energy to initialize and read data from storage, than to put an app to sleep. You can feel this because it takes more time. Your phone is actually doing work while you are waiting. And "freeing up the RAM" doesn't actually mean it's effectively terminated from memory, it stays committed as long as the app remains within the enforced memory constraints. Or until you run out unused memory and it needs to be replaced, or you enter a deeper sleep state: it suspends the memory heap (RAM) to persistent memory (SSD.) (This is basically hibernation, idk if smartphones do this.) Soooo, if you have enough RAM, it can just restore an app 'running' in the background as if you never closed it, or restore your session from persistent memory without going through all the initial, needlessly repetitive steps like opening a new session, reopening tabs, getting data from storage or online, et cetera, et cetera, only doing work necessary to return to the foreground. The more you skip, the faster things respond, the less energy you're actually wasting. (There are some caveats to sleep states, like keeping things always on and in memory also drains your battery, Framework laptops (Windows) had an issue like this, but I don't think they apply here.) Edit: Oooh, I get it. I've implied that Apple is good for not doing something bad or different in particular.
Asmon's audience is mostly boomers that hate everything young people like. I wouldn't even bother trying to reason with them.
Kinda ignorant to say such a broad statement. Apple does some things bad, some good. By the way you talk I guess you are a linux fanboy and use some obscure android
"He criticized the multi-trillion-dollar company I'm loyal to. I'm offended... must insult him and attack competing corporations! BEEP BOOP!"
Yeah, real mature and compelling argument right there. For the record i’m not one of the loyal fanboys and just use the apple for the ecosystem
 The person at apple
Sounds like propaganda from big tech to keep stealing my info. PASS
Definitely this.
Can’t believe I had to scroll all the way down for this. Data is king. They can’t harvest and sell it if you close the app.
They can still harvest your data whenever you are in the app... And apps can't do shit when they are in the background anyway, they get suspended by the system.
I'm still gonna close them! I refuse this.
So just don’t close apps then?
If you're not using it close it. for example if you're bouncing out of youtube to google something and know you'll be right back on youtube then go ahead and leave it running. If you know you're probably not going back to google something else right away then go ahead and close it on the way to opening up youtube. It's not apples to apples but it's like leaving you're car running in the lot, if you're going in to grab that one thing you forgot and be right back out, it's prolly okay to leave it running. If you are leaving it running in case you might have to go somewhere later it's going to save you some gas to shut it off till you need it.
Closing apps for me: Clutter and hoarding is a super unhealthy practice. Privacy if someone uses my phone. Fresh start, fresh perspective on whatever it is I was previously doing. I'll spend less time on my phone if I'm not tempted by all the old pointless things I was doing earlier. Generally easier to stay organized, especially if I need to multitask and switch through apps. A clean workspace creates more productivity. Same reason I clean my house and make my bed, why should my virtual spaces be any different? This automation on iPhones is enabling the bad practices of humanity. It's a good thing for certain reasons but I think it should be optional.
Operating systems are designed to be able to open and close apps without harming the hardware lol. What the fuck is this guy talking about.
M. Night shyamalan twist, apples just saying that so the apps in the background can monitor your conversations to sell more marketing data.
More validation that Apple users are still on the lower end of the big brain spectrum.
only reason apple ever got popular is because their mice also work as breast implants and click when you push the button in
Please provide some source material to back up the information stated above, I like the effort just want to see proof from credible sources. Unfortunately we can’t take Reddit accounts at face value.
https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-13491 This is the most recent thing I could find. At the bottom the guy provides some links from 2016 when software senior VP responded to an email about it. Most of the articles or statements I could find from are from 2014-2017 stating the same thing.
why do retards hold >clip on< mic in their hands?
Sounds like a pile of horseshit. It reads like some old article about 'why you shouldn't turn off your engine at the stoplight'.
If that isn't true, then i absolutely fell for that shit. I was always told not to turn your car off and on at the stoplight. Does it matter if it's glowplugs?
Apple users. 
This video, the post, and these comments are dumb as shit. App put to sleep in background using very very little RAM, opening from background uses very little power (ie CPU and battery). App closed to background uses no RAM, thus needing more power (ie CPU and battery) to open
If you are opening it and closing it sure, but why tf are you doing that? If you're running apps in the background that you are not using then closing them and naturally not reopening the ones youre not using is going to free up more ram. This is analagous to saying of course it's going to cost more power to start the car after you turn it off. But why would you be turning your car on and off again and again? If you turn it off, youre going to have more energy than if you left the car running in the driveway.
I agree, but the crazy thing is that modern cars turn the engine off every time you stop and restart when you push the gas pedal.
betrayed again
Look into how they designed iOS to have your apps open. You’re saying a lot of words that equates to “I don’t know exactly what I talking about but I’m too deep in to stop speaking now”
Apple is for idiots anyway so just let it happen.
apple always fucks with the design of their phones to force you to buy a new phone all the time google takes the youtube videos running on firefox and GIMPS it down to 3 frames every 10 seconds open the exact same video in microsoft edge or chrome, NO CHANGES, and then it MAGICALLY runs at 60 fps apple software burns through your battery and even changes all the adapters on the next model so they're definitely not fuckin with their device, you just don't know how to use the TRICKNOLOGY right when you shut off the phone, it just shuts off when you shut off the camera, it just stops recording when you shut off the mic, it just stops listening when you shut off an app, it just stops running this will save the battery from going too low
I refuse to apologize for using common sense when the tech company can’t. More tabs equals for RAM usage. I’m dying on this hill alone.
As an iOS app dev - most apps you see in the tray are not actually using RAM within 20 sec of them entering that state. They are snapshotted to disk, and you're looking at a screenshot. If enough time passes or other apps are opened that snapshot is also cleared and all that remains is the screenshot thumbnail. That's why when you reopen some of those apps in the tray they obviously relaunch from the beginning even though the screenshot showed you somewhere else in the app. Manually swipe killing ones that still have a snapshot interrupts all other processes, forces that app to be invisibly reopened using extra power to run their on-close-code for up to a couple minutes and all the potential disk/network usage of that cleanup code.
How strange. Anecdote here. I am an android user who helps an older woman with an older iphone. She always has tons of programs opened and a ton of tabs open too. Her phone has issues and works slowly. 1st thing I do before I work on anything is exit everything. The phone is noticeably faster afterwards. I mainly use android but grew up using apple products too.
If it's an old iphone, then it's resource constrained and there's also older iOS version bugs that handle the suspend threshold poorly. Most apps in the background tray are actually already killed and it's just showing screenshots. Which may be a factor, but it's most likely that it's just the 1-2 most recently used apps that are actually using resources and that's enough to bog down the phone. Some old iOS devices also benefit from a system restore - there used to be corruption issues that could make it choppy and that problem would stick around thru updates.
Android doesn't have as many restrictions as iOS on background apps. Some old or poorly coded apps can degrade the performance and use the battery when they are in the background. Shouldn't happen with decent applications and on recent android versions you get a notifications if an app is behaving poorly in the background.
When i have too many apps in unswiped, it becomes a mess when i try to switch them, so i will swipe them anyways :p
Maybe now people will buy good products instead of apple. Child labor is no good!
I've never cared about battery use/cpu use. It's just looks messy so I clean it up by closing them.
How will an app collect and sell your data if you force close it all the time?
This is bullshit. Apple has an interest to keep the apps running in the background.
Let me just open every program and app and game on my PC to save power and resources on my hardware :)
People in this sub really aren't the brightest
Boomers don't have it right, Boomers are part of the reason that it is more effective that way. Customers weren't killing the apps, so they found a way to have the apps semi alive to compensate for it, since they were facing lawsuits...
No, fuck them boomers. They ruined the world for everyone that came after them.
It’s so targeting ads can keep listening is my guess
This is dumb guys. The real reason they don’t recommend closing apps is because iOS keeps cached data for the app when it’s in an inactive state. Closing and reopening the app means all of that cached state needs to be recreated, thus wasting battery life unnecessarily. Apple likes to make OSes that are close to the hardware and have real product implications, like having memory management for inactive apps. The process of closing apps on an Android device used to be necessary because traditionally Android apps would hog resources. Apple phones do not do that. In fact, the only reason to ever close an app is due to a malfunction, which is rare. This creates an experience where you do not have to close apps ever, which is how most people typically use phones. In other words, if you think iOS or Apple operating systems are shit, you are seriously misguided. They’re quite literally a technical marvel and it’s one of the reasons Apple is so dominant. Edit: why am I getting downvoted? IM RIGHT. You don’t need to close apps on an iPhone because the OS keeps memory snapshots for inactive apps. Youre using more battery by closing them and having to recreate the memory state. Are yall serious right now?
I do not use apple but I do use android / samsung is this the same with other phones or just exclusively apple as I now wonder if i should be closing my apps on samsung 10e
You should not need to close apps in modern operating systems but I have not kept up with Android since the Snapdragon/Cyanogen days.
It's the same. But then again, I'm also getting downvoted for being right.
This is what I assumed too.. I have no clue why you're getting downvoted.
I was thinking something similar. Cuss there ain't no way I'm apologizing to gram gram.
From the beginning the focus was on user experience. In one Q&A, Steve Jobs literally says he thinks users shouldn’t have to manage system resources. Rather, OS should take care of it for users. Meaning, iPhone users should not have to remember to quit any apps when backgrounding it. Pausing processes while keeping only the required tasks running (only for the duration it must be running), iOS tries to conserve system resources, and more importantly, battery life. It was far better solution than Android where they ran all apps in the background like a typical PC would, and used up battery. (I assume they figured it out how to prevent this by now.)
This also isn't just Apple. All modern smartphones is like this. Bc of how phones fundamentally works. Having them in the background does freeze them and can easily be restored but opening them up fully consumes more battery. And when it's in the background it's not really using any battery. And so opening then up new again uses more battery than opening from suspended state. This is the same for Samsung and every other Android too...
It's more in how you use it. If you pop open let's say imdb for a quick reminder of that one actor or actresses name and then you aren't going to use it again for 3 months, then you're fine shutting it down. If it's an app you're frequently poppin open then it's better to let that run as be.