Exiting Applications

[lionel47]

Maybe I am a little thick. However, I realize that a lot of apps do not have an Exit button. Are they just running in the background all the time?

[bugeyed]

Originally Posted by lionel47

Maybe I am a little thick. However, I realize that a lot of apps do not have an Exit button. Are they just running in the background all the time?

The way I understand it, Android works differently than Windows. Switching back to the home screen or another app. is how you exit an app. On a fully implemented Android device, you can install App. Killer, but that is not usually necessary.

[SCION]

Since yours is rooted, you may want to install Advanced Task Killer. I use it occasionally.

[KryptoNyte]

Originally Posted by lionel47

Maybe I am a little thick. However, I realize that a lot of apps do not have an Exit button. Are they just running in the background all the time?

The Nook Color is my first Android device and I have to admit, this OS behavior surprised the heck out of me. Coming from 15+ years of Windows use, I found it amazing that there is no "close" button of any kind for any application. It's just downright strange as heck that all apps just sit in background memory (and some of them CPU) after use until they are "killed" by some secondary application, and all this on devices that I would consider mildly RAM deficient in this day and age.

I use a task killer app all the time.

[zeroh]

from what i've come to understand is that when you switch out of an app, it's held in memory until the OS decides it needs more memory and kills the oldest inactive app. There's no real overhead in keeping an app in memory as it doesn't use cpu. You really can't relate it to current desktop OS'es because even when you put a process in background or "minimized" that app will still be active.

[jasonkchapman]

That's the way I understand it, too, zeroh. Getting the automatic resource management right has been a large part of the last few iterations--what to clean up, when, and whether or not certain applications can "excused" from the process. It gives the effect of having a lot more system resources than the device really has.

[KryptoNyte]

Just out of curiosity, if I'm running a background program/process, such as a sync application or maybe email, or messaging, how do I gain control over Android, so it doesn't shut this down to make room for some other app that it thinks should have precedence?

It sounds like it treats closed apps similar to how Windows Mobile did. In WM they stayed open but mostly inactive, but WM didn't always handle them corrrectly and a Stop command occasionally had to be issued through its convoluted menu system! Of course that was 5 years ago so perhaps it got better with time.

While I have your attention, I read someplace that Android actually runs on top of Linux. Is that true? Wouldn't that just make it a Linux GUI? Don't get me wrong, I love my NC, which is unrooted, but I've never cared at all for Android. It seems rather kluge. I tried a few Android tablets and found them to be about as useless as Windows 98. Actually, Win98 was much more intuitive, but they both seem to crash a lot. I was very pleasantly surprised by the NC.

[LoganK]

Originally Posted by KryptoNyte

Just out of curiosity, if I'm running a background program/process, such as a sync application or maybe email, or messaging, how do I gain control over Android, so it doesn't shut this down to make room for some other app that it thinks should have precedence?

Android has various levels of Activities, Services, and Receivers with various priorities in place for recovering resources. If you set up your application properly, you generally don't need to worry about getting shut down.

Originally Posted by jswinden

It sounds like it treats closed apps similar to how Windows Mobile did.

Yes, it is very similar. The formalized difference distinction between a Service and an Activity goes a long way toward making this an even better idea.

Originally Posted by jswinden

While I have your attention, I read someplace that Android actually runs on top of Linux. Is that true? Wouldn't that just make it a Linux GUI?

In a small sense, yes. To use the much-loved car analogies, the motor is Linux but the entire rest of the car is Android. (Does that make the passengers applications? )

Originally Posted by jswinden

Don't get me wrong, I love my NC, which is unrooted, but I've never cared at all for Android. It seems rather kluge.

So far it is the best and most productive mobile environment I've used. There are a lot of things that could be polished, but I'd hardly call it a kluge.

It isn't quite ready for being a Tablet OS yet, but it's certainly functional.

Originally Posted by jswinden

Actually, Win98 was much more intuitive, but they both seem to crash a lot. I was very pleasantly surprised by the NC.

It's all about implementation. That $90 tablet probably will crash, but that's because it was built fast, cheap, and without intention of supporting it. I have only a few Android devices, but none of them crash or operate in a surprising manner.

To say that Windows 98 is intuitive is unfair as that interface is probably what you have used since you first came into contact with computers. Android itself seems very consistent and easy to learn, but not all of the application developers agree on the best interface guidelines (just like Windows...).

Good points. The two I had owned briefly were the SmartQ V7 and the Archos 5IT. The Archos had some strange Archos hybrid GUI and it was horrible. The SmartQ was a bit too kluge for me. But the NC seems to be really good, though I haven't rooted it and am only using the B&N GUI layer (or whatever it is called). The NC seems like a real tablet that doesn't require a lot of hacking.

Actually I started out with MS DOS and PC DOS (1981), moved to the original Mac OS on a Macintosh SE (1985?) during graduate school, then MS Windows 3.1 and on down the line when I joined the corporate world. I had some experience with AIX while working at IBM, but never cared for it much as I am a SLOW typist and proned to many typos! Me using command line OSes causes people near me to hear all sorts of colorful language, if you get my drift.

I'm definitely tempted to root my NC though, but will probably wait until B&N upgrades it to Android 2.2 and the Android gurus develop the rooting for that.

Thanks for all the info.

[LoganK]

Originally Posted by jswinden

The two I had owned briefly were the SmartQ V7 and the Archos 5IT. The Archos had some strange Archos hybrid GUI and it was horrible. The SmartQ was a bit too kluge for me.

Yeah, I'm not entirely clear on the motivation that drives companies to branch out and write their own replacement software components. I would expect they are afraid that the Android market may eventually be dominated by hardware quality and price alone, so they differentiate themselves by being Android but different. Then users are upset because the half-assed new interface doesn't work as well as the standard interface with years of development put into it.

I think it is quite amusing that the marketing campaign for the new Nexus S is simply "Pure Google". It is a recognition that a large segment of the market is looking for a stable, consistent experience when it comes to Android.

[sjkevin]

Originally Posted by jswinden

I've never cared at all for Android. It seems rather kluge.

Yeah, that's been my experience, too.

For coders, the android API is confusing and inconsistent at first, and there aren't many good books on programming android. So, there can be quality problems.

Hopefully things will improve as the platform matures and more programmers become skilled with it.