Did you try it yet? I can confirm it works like other people here who have done it and can say it works too. So why not give it a try and see for yourself.who ever confirmed that this worked in the first place. I'm taking this with a grain of salt until someone can prove it.
I doubt sleep mode will care if the apps are OPEN in the background much less if they even running (which they aren't)
![]()
I personally think it's a load of crap. YES, it does indeed close the applications, but I do not for one second believe it preserves battery life.Did you try it yet? I can confirm it works like other people here who have done it and can say it works too. So why not give it a try and see for yourself.
No, actually you are dumb. It makes total sense. It is just like in a computer. When a program is open it still uses memory even if you are not acively using it. The same happens with the iPhone.I personally think it's a load of crap. YES, it does indeed close the applications, but I do not for one second believe it preserves battery life.
The most reasonable way to preserve your battery is to keep WiFi and WiFi auto-connect off when you're not using it, to keep bluetooth off when you're not using it, and to turn your screen brightness down. I'm getting 2 days without charging typically, and have gone as long as 3 days.
And I NEVER use the "hold home" button thingy. It's dumb. LOL
![]()
Funny, I never called YOU dumb, just this method to "save battery life".No, actually you are dumb. It makes total sense. It is just like in a computer. When a program is open it still uses memory even if you are not acively using it. The same happens with the iPhone.![]()
LOL, okay.I'm not even gonna bother anymore in talking to you... some people are just stuck and I'm not gonna be the one struggling with you. I'm happy that some people got it to work and believe it does, that's enough for me. Thanks
Not entirely. Using memory and wasting processor cycles are two separate issues. [Mac] OS X uses a scheme called Virtual Memory. Any memory it can't map to physical memory, it dumps off into a swap file on the hard drive (or in the iPhone's case, the Flash memory). So when you switch applications it just reloads the memory from the hard drive's cache, letting you bounce back to where you were before.When a program is open it still uses memory even if you are not ac[t]ively using it.
You are not supposed to "force quit it" every time you are gonna close it, just when you are not going to use it for a while.Not entirely. Using memory and wasting processor cycles are two separate issues. [Mac] OS X uses a scheme called Virtual Memory. Any memory it can't map to physical memory, it dumps off into a swap file on the hard drive (or in the iPhone's case, the Flash memory). So when you switch applications it just reloads the memory from the hard drive's cache, letting you bounce back to where you were before.
afaik, ram and the iPhone's flash-based memory use the same amount of power whether something is being stored or not. If this force-quitting theory was true, you'd get worse and worse battery life as the drive was being more filled with files. That obviously can't be true in practice. On a hard drive based model, this is somewhat true, as you have to physically move to more parts of the drive to access the files that are stored on the outer ring of the drive. But I'd wager it's negligible.
Quitting and relaunching an application is a pretty cpu intensive process because it also has to potentially load in any shared libraries as well.
On the iPhone, it also looks like the applications relaunch themselves after being force quit, because they immediately activate to being launched. This fits the device's paradigm of "you don't quit and launch applications, you just switch to them."
Still think it's ridiculous, but I know you're not going to waste your time arguing with me about it - LOL - "force quit" is for when an application freezes. There is no reason to force quit when you're not going to use that application for a while... the power it would be consuming is negligible.You are not supposed to "force quit it" every time you are gonna close it, just when you are not going to use it for a while.
I don't know what the manual says, but Apple's site refers to "force quitting" (by holding the home button for more than 5 seconds) when an application freezes.I wondered about this issue as well. Anyone know what the manual says about it?
If your theory were true, as Spin This agrees, you'd get worse and worse performance as time wore on... which isn't the case at all.