Top Android Phone Makers Are Killing Useful Background Processes and Breaking 3rd-Party Apps To 'Superficially Improve' Battery Life, Developers Allege (dontkillmyapp.com)

Good by ArchieBunker · 2019-01-14 03:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

We don't need that shit running in the background. Much like every windows program that wants to run at startup.

--
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard

Re:Good by grep+-v+'.*'+* · 2019-01-14 04:21 · Score: 1

I've got a Xiaomi phone that for a few tasks, I had to "drill down" and disable the automatic power-saving mode. Not hard to do but was slightly hidden. Noticed when a few apps "Back Button" were still there on the GUI but not actually functional.

No big. Glad they did it (and also glad they left an escape to disable it for specific apps.)

--
If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
Re:Good by svanheulen · 2019-01-14 04:41 · Score: 3, Interesting

While I agree for most applications, I'm actually having a problem with this behavior on my Samsung phone. I use an always-on VPN which will often lose connection and then not reconnect because the system has stopped/suspended the VPN application. There are options for disabling the Samsung "battery saver" functions for certain applications but even after doing that, it still happens (although not as often).
Re:Good by The-Ixian · 2019-01-14 04:49 · Score: 2

I have found on my OP that adding apps to the "don't optimize" list in Android and/or "locking" the app in the run list solves any issues arising from battery optimizations.
I have a couple of apps (smart wifi toggler and calls blacklist pro) that need to run all the time. Doing the above solved the issue of those apps getting killed.

--
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
Re:Good by crow · 2019-01-14 04:54 · Score: 2

Exactly.
I want to stop a lot of apps from being able to self-start. For most apps, if I don't click on it, it should never start, but obviously there are exceptions. Whether they're self-starting for nefarious reasons, or for features I'm not interested in, I want them locked down.
Likewise for background operation. Many apps shouldn't be running in the background at all, and I would like the ability to control this.
I also want the ability to turn off network access to apps that don't need it (at least for any feature I'm using). I've started using the NetGuard app that runs as a VPN to give me this feature, but it should be available by default. Remember when Android used to consider network access as an app permission? Bring that back so that I can deny it.
Re:Good by Iwastheone · 2019-01-14 06:00 · Score: 2

I've had to resort to using "NoRoot Firewall" (by Grey Shirts) to block apps access on my non-rooted phone to keep Facebook & other apps from phoning home.
Re:Good by GuB-42 · 2019-01-14 06:10 · Score: 2

We don't need that shit running in the background.
That's unless you do.
You don't want apps running in the background, except you want to be notified of messages by your favorite instant messenger, or you want your fitness tracker to actually track, or be notified of traffic jams.
What you really want, like everyone else, is that your phone magically guesses which background processes you want and with ones you don't. Unfortunately, there is no magic, but it doesn't stop manufacturers from trying, and failing.
The worst part is that there is not standard. It results in apps behaving differently depending on smartphone models, with different kinds of manual overrides.
Re:Good by crow · 2019-01-14 06:48 · Score: 1

Sounds like essentially the same thing as what I'm using.
https://f-droid.org/en/package...
I'm sure I'll soon hit the problem of not being able to run more than one VPN at a time. I also don't like that it means there's always a notification telling me that it's running.
The one you mention says it doesn't support LTE, which makes it rather useless for me. I also like the idea of using open source apps from F-Droid when possible.
https://play.google.com/store/...
Re:Good by Puls4r · 2019-01-14 07:21 · Score: 1

Except I don't. There's only three "apps" I want to constantly update. That's my phone (so it rings when people call), my email, and my text messaging.

Not instagram, snapchat, etc. Nevermind that I don't use them, there is NO good way in the android ecosystem to prevent them from staying resident in the background if you run them once. Many other apps have this same problem. For no good reason at all, they are sitting in the background. There is no one ounce of functionality they add to my user experience by doing so. And I actually suspect many of them are bad actors and are sending location and other data.

Give me an option that kills every process with a given program when I exit out of it. I'll be happy. I've long had this complaint with android.
Re:Good by war4peace · 2019-01-14 07:31 · Score: 1

Wait, wait...
You might not need some shit that is running in the background. I might need it. Joe Thirdparty might see some of that shit as essential.
Here's an example: The instant messaging app that my company is using (namely Slack). I absolutely require it to be running in the background, so that if there's an issue which requires my attention, I could be pinged and work on it. If the OS decides for me (which happens more and more often and I hate it!), I would end up not receiving messages when I have to.
Not cool.
While we're at it, I am being notified multiple times a day by my Samsung phone that it runs in performance mode. I KNOW! I set it that way, and no, I don't want it any other way. But the OS still bugs me about it, with no way to turn off that notification.

--
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Re: Good by c6gunner · 2019-01-14 09:35 · Score: 2

New versions of android (starting with either nougat or oreo) do give you the ability to block network access to either WiFi or cell networks, or both.
LineageOS (via privacy guard) gives you the option to prevent apps from auto-starting, as well as to prevent them from running in the background.
Re:Good by Iwastheone · 2019-01-14 09:54 · Score: 1

LTE & this app is what I've been using for a year without issues. As to exactly where this app re-directs to, I don't know, nor care. My browsing habits may be appearing on the screen of the President of China, as long as Facebook and other uninstallable apps are blocked, I'm ok with it. Side benefit is any non-online game can be used without constant ad bombardment. :)
Re:Good by Iwastheone · 2019-01-14 10:16 · Score: 1

Next time you get that notification, do a 'long press' on it. A submenu should come up that'll let you block notifications from that app.
Re:Good by crow · 2019-01-14 10:33 · Score: 1

I suppose the text on the Google Play store refers to an older version or only applies to some LTE networks.
Re: Good by crow · 2019-01-14 10:35 · Score: 1

I can turn off background mobile data on a per-app basis, but not data overall. With NetGuard, I can block the network on apps that only use it for advertising or spying, making them fully useful again.
Re:Good by war4peace · 2019-01-14 18:29 · Score: 1

Yes, same thing happens to my phone, took me a looong time to figure out why that happens.

--
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Re: Good by c6gunner · 2019-01-14 19:05 · Score: 1

On Oreo I have 3 separate toggles for each app:
WiFi data
Mobile data
Background data
I used to have a firewall app, but no longer need it. The only thing I miss is the ability to disable all connectivity by default and only grant it to apps which I intentionally enable.
Re:Good by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 02:07 · Score: 1

We don't need that shit running in the background.
You never specified what is running in the background. You don't need a trigger service running in the background when you want to trigger on events? You don't need a syncing service running in the background when you want to automatically cloud sync?
Because that's the "shit" we're talking about. Samsung by default will kill both the Owncloud and IFTTT clients.
Re: Good by crow · 2019-01-15 03:23 · Score: 1

I'm also on Oreo (Samsung S8 on AT&T). So either Samsung or AT&T disabled the toggles for WiFi and Mobile data on a per-app basis, because it isn't there for me.
On the plus side for running a VPN, I can also use a hosts file to block ads.

Useful background processes? by QuietLagoon · 2019-01-14 03:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

Useful background processes that are useful for whom? The developers who want to harvest data continuously?

Re:Useful background processes? by agoodm · 2019-01-14 03:37 · Score: 2

To me! Android Doze broke K9mail unless you found some obscure menu which disabled the functionality. Its a total mess!
Re:Useful background processes? by spire3661 · 2019-01-14 04:27 · Score: 1

Email should be pull not push.

--
Good-bye
Re:Useful background processes? by MightyYar · 2019-01-14 04:41 · Score: 1

Why? I mean, I have mine configured as pull, but what is wrong with getting a notification when you have a new email?

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:Useful background processes? by Boern1138 · 2019-01-14 04:47 · Score: 1

That's like, your opinion, man. E-mail push has been available for a while and worked perfectly fine. But the bigger problem is that often even periodic pull (setup to the interval I prefer) would not work unless you ripped out the power management "feature" from seven million different locations. And I would very much like a chat application that is totally independent of Google. Jabber is practically dead on Android because of the fucked up power management. It's ok for the OS to suspend overzealous background services. But please give me the ability to override that easily.
Re:Useful background processes? by itsme1234 · 2019-01-14 04:52 · Score: 1

Maybe it's time to give up dial-up?
Re:Useful background processes? by QuietLagoon · 2019-01-14 05:15 · Score: 1

...To me! ...
I'm not saying that there is no use for background processes that benefits the users. But maybe google is locking things down in order to go after the data harvesters, and those who use the background processes for valid purposes can continue to do so (once they fix their code to work properly).
Re:Useful background processes? by MightyYar · 2019-01-14 06:30 · Score: 1

Not everyone keeps their mail app open constantly, and its a drain on phone resources to check every 2-3 minutes.
OK, I agree - which is why I have mine set to be pull. I have colleagues and friends who like it to be push.

Email is an asynchronous form of communication, if its really urgent, perhaps they should text, or even better, pick up the phone and call (all assuming they can't even have the conversation face-to-face).
I agree on the phone call, but texting is not any better than email. I have texts (especially MMS) that come hours or even days after they were sent on occasion. Email is old, standardized, and mostly reliable. With SMTP and IMAP, you have a system that is more reliable than texts - and if you are looking for robustness you can even configure return receipts. You can do this with texts as well, but it's a lot more finicky at the moment.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:Useful background processes? by dwpro · 2019-01-14 07:11 · Score: 2

Strangely, the issue is the exact opposite. Push notifications, ie, firebase messages, actually work fine, it's the stuff that needs to wake up and do something on a schedule basis when the phone is in 'deep doze' that get the shaft. Check out the 'FCM' section here for more info. Regardless, even with explicit battery saving exclusions, we are unable to do get GPS location when the phone goes into deep doze after an hour no matter what we do. Quite frustrating to try and do real work on a phone with these arbitrary (and unevenly distributed) restrictions.

--
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
Re:Useful background processes? by aaronb1138 · 2019-01-14 07:43 · Score: 1

GPS is computationally and radio expensive on the battery. You should not have access to it while in deep doze. Plus this helps as a psuedo-security measure to help prevent apps from harvesting continuous location data from users.

What exactly is your use case for which you need full precision location information while the user is not using the phone?
Re:Useful background processes? by dwpro · 2019-01-14 08:08 · Score: 1

In my case, it's creating a breadcrumb trail for them so we can detect how many tobacco ads/stores they have come in contact with in their daily routes for the purpose of helping folks quit smoking and getting better data on exposure vs quit attempts. Despite motion supposedly waking deep-doze, it doesn't work reliably for us. It does drain the battery, of course, though not as badly as you might expect, at least on 6.x back when it worked reliably. Shouldn't the user be able to opt-in for this sort of tracking if they prefer?

--
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
Re:Useful background processes? by spire3661 · 2019-01-15 05:50 · Score: 1

For me personally it adds to an already unacceptable signal-to-noise ratio in real-time communications. Email is asynchronous and always pull to me. If you want to reach me in real time, use a synchronous comm channel.

--
Good-bye
Re:Useful background processes? by MightyYar · 2019-01-15 06:02 · Score: 1

OK, but it doesn't hurt you or your workflow to have it configurable either way. People who want it to be close to real-time are happy and you are also happy, right?

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:Useful background processes? by spire3661 · 2019-01-15 06:39 · Score: 1

The unfortunate part of communicating via text/forums is that everything seems like you are forcing a dichotomy unless you couch it very carefully. Yes, you are absolutely right, choice is good. There is a better way to have this conversation, i'll try to be more articulate in the future.

--
Good-bye
Re:Useful background processes? by MightyYar · 2019-01-15 07:00 · Score: 1

Ah, good ol' miscommunication... Rereading your comments I can see where I went wrong.

--
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Re:Useful background processes? by tepples · 2019-01-15 07:12 · Score: 1

That's a bit tricky when the ISP quotes you six figures to upgrade from dial-up to broadband (source 1; source 2; source 3).

Superficially? by Junta · 2019-01-14 03:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

What, some background process that's responsible for somehow updating the batter meter, resulting in it not going down even though the battery is going down?

No, that's not the case? Then the battery life is not 'superficially' extended, it is either extended or it isn't. If they claim better battery life as a reason, but they don't actually get battery life, that is not superficially extended, that is flat out incorrect.

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.

Re:Superficially? by Luthair · 2019-01-14 04:45 · Score: 1

Yea, I think they probably meant artificially. Its artificial because it may affect the user's usage of the phone.
Re:Superficially? by Wrath0fb0b · 2019-01-14 07:12 · Score: 1

It's superficial because they are getting gains in battery life by removing functionality rather than actually improving the capacity or efficiency of the phone. That is, it connotes an improvement in the superficial appearance of things -- looking better rather than being better.
Re:Superficially? by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 02:18 · Score: 1

Then the battery life is not 'superficially' extended, it is either extended or it isn't.
Splitting hairs will not help your cause. There are many apps that do background related tasks so infrequently that killing them has no more than a "superficial" improvement, which as the definition of the word implies it makes no difference at all to battery life.
Android does not have an internal task scheduler so apps need to suspend themselves in order to run tasks. While they are suspended they have practically no impact on the device.

Quite annoying by Tomahawk · 2019-01-14 03:39 · Score: 4, Interesting

This is quite annoying. I found stuff like 'FolderSync', which will allow you to, say, copy the contents of a directory from your phone to your Google Drive automatically every night, would get killed off mid copy as it runs as a background tab.

Similarly when copying a large file using a file manager, or downloading a large file in the background.

It's possible to set an app up as an exception, but you have to do this for all applications that you want to be able to run in the background.
Yes there are some apps that you probably don't want to run, but it's really frustrating when it stops the apps you want to allow run, and you have to go hunting for a setting that has a different name on each phone.

Re:Quite annoying by rcderp · 2019-01-14 06:21 · Score: 1

I recently (a few weeks ago) purchased a Nokia 6.1. I previously had a Samsung S7. I am using the same apps on the Nokia as I did on the Samsung. I have had quite a few apps that run some sort of background process and are now getting killed off regularly. I initially thought this may be related to the adaptive battery feature (New phone, so the machine learning behind this feature has to be 'trained'). After some experimentation, that didn't seem to be it. Although the apps I've seen affected are all over the board (system utilities, games, instant messaging), the most obvious one is a popular battery usage monitoring app. The app is designed to run in the background and record which apps are consuming the most battery. This app's background process (where all the work is done) is killed off after about 10-20 minutes. I can get it to resume if I open the UI again, but that defeats the purpose of the app if I have to constantly re-open the app.
Re:Quite annoying by argStyopa · 2019-01-14 07:38 · Score: 1

Oh I disagree.
Essentially you're asserting apps should be able to run in background, unless you opt-out. That's a security nightmare.
Far better to say on install "hey this has to run in the background to function, ok?". I can't tell you the number of apps I've uninstalled for background-running shenanigans - why does Soundcloud need to know my LOCATION, for example? Or this gps application need access to my contact list?

--
-Styopa
Re:Quite annoying by argStyopa · 2019-01-15 08:00 · Score: 1

Obviously it has. OP is suggesting that apps be defaulted as able to run in background, why wouldn't we use the same affirm-to-whitelist procedure for this as for access to other facts of the phone?

--
-Styopa

Smaller and Thicker! by Zorro · 2019-01-14 03:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

Smaller and thicker phones with a decently thick battery.

We DON'T need a 7 inch phone as thin as a knife!

Re:Smaller and Thicker! by tooyoung · 2019-01-14 05:54 · Score: 2

We DON'T need a 7 inch phone as thin as a knife!
But then you wouldn't need to also carry a knife!
Re:Smaller and Thicker! by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 02:19 · Score: 1

Smaller and thicker phones with a decently thick battery.
Phones have been getting thicker and batteries have been getting larger consistently across models for the past 3 years. If you want an even thicker device, get yourself a battery boosting case and don't pretend like you speak for everyone.

Actually OnePlus gives you control by Pedestrianwolf · 2019-01-14 03:53 · Score: 1

I have a OnePlus 6 and I was having issues with applications getting killed in the background. Most frustratingly was when my couch to 5K app got task killed with about 45 seconds left at the end of my run. But guess what? In the settings menu you can disable battery optimization for specific apps. Haven't had a problem since.

Re:Actually OnePlus gives you control by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-14 04:00 · Score: 1

Run faster?

Bitching About User Control by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-14 03:53 · Score: 1, Interesting

Seriously? You're bitching about having control of what hidden things your phone is doing? This is not a bad thing. Your phone shouldn't be doing shit behind your back without your explicit permission. ... and you're talking about important things, like bulk copies of files. That's a very good thing for you to have control over.

Re: Bitching About User Control by Tomahawk · 2019-01-14 04:16 · Score: 2

The issue is when you download an app and expect it to work, and it doesn't. And the reason is because the phone manufacturer decided to kill the app off and not tell you. And then you complain to the dev that it doesn't work and the poor dev is left telling you how to fix something that the phone manufacturer put in place that's non-standard.
I currently have a problem where chromecast connections (from YouTube or NetFlix) get disconnected on my phone when I turn the screen off. My chromecast will still play, but if I open the app again I generally have to reconnect, or even kill off the app and run it again and then reconnect. It's likely caused by Sony killing off some background processes, and I can't find what process it's killing off.

Android is a mess by DogDude · 2019-01-14 03:58 · Score: 2, Insightful

I just got an Android phone because I had to due (main phone is a Windows phone). Holy shit, what a mess it is. It has tons of processes that are indecipherable. How does anybody manage all of that?

--
I don't respond to AC's.

Re:Android is a mess by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-14 04:14 · Score: 1

I just got an Android phone because I had to due (main phone is a Windows phone). Holy shit, what a mess it is. It has tons of processes that are indecipherable. How does anybody manage all of that?
They buy an iPhone instead. It has a well-designed, mature OS.
Re:Android is a mess by ilsaloving · 2019-01-14 04:38 · Score: 3, Interesting

How does anybody manage all of that?
Wrong question. The real question is why should a user HAVE to manage their phone like a sysadmin?
It's a phone. It's an *appliance*. If a user is required to manage their phone to such a degree, then there are severe and fundamental flaws in the phone's OS.
This all stems from the fact that Google gave developers too much control, and developers treated phones as if they were PCs instead of embedded mobile devices. As much as I hate to say it, Apple was right to start with a locked down OS. It is always more difficult to take away permissions and capabilities than it is to gradually give them.
It's been very well established at this point that developers cannot be trusted to do this properly, so it's up to the OS to be tight-fisted in how apps operate. This is especially true when it comes to limited-resource devices like phones. Now Android is in the completely expected position of trying to lock things down without breaking half the apps on the app store.
Re:Android is a mess by unrealmp3 · 2019-01-14 04:41 · Score: 2

The file manager is a joke though.
Re:Android is a mess by dwpro · 2019-01-14 07:28 · Score: 1

if you want the phone to be a dumb appliance, that's your call, but I think many of us actually want _more_ control, not less. I have my phone hook up as the controller for a coffee roaster, and I don't want my background processes dying mid-roast (like it does now, post android version update). For a platform as diverse as android, I could see a spectrum of options being available, but specifically dis-allowing functionality that many users would find useful to appease those who want a dumb device is in no way what _I_ want. Make the battery power better, sure, but let us opt-out easily and in an unrestricted manner.

--
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
Re:Android is a mess by ilsaloving · 2019-01-14 08:42 · Score: 1

What you are talking about is tangental to my point.
You are specifically trying to use a phone for a purpose it was never made for. You could accomplish the same thing with an arduino or a raspberry pi.
The fact that you *can* do it with a phone is pretty cool, and I see no problem with giving people the option to hack their phone to pieces if they so choose.
But when the average person buys a phone and takes it out of the box, it is an appliance. An advanced appliance that can run arbitrary software, but it's an appliance none-the-less, and *expecting* users to don their sysadmin hat *just* to maintain their phone is completely unacceptable.
Re:Android is a mess by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 02:22 · Score: 1

It has tons of processes that are indecipherable. How does anybody manage all of that?
Easy answer. You don't. The fact that you even see the tons of processes means that you are not using the OS, you ARE the OS. Android will run perfectly fine with you ever seeing any process referenced which you didn't specifically install. This includes the topic at hand which is about apps being killed and nothing to do with indecipherable background processes that users never see.
Re:Android is a mess by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 02:27 · Score: 1

This all stems from the fact that Google gave developers too much control, and developers treated phones as if they were PCs instead of embedded mobile devices.
This is a counter to an argument that was never fully explored. The GP said "how does anybody manage all of that", the answer is people don't. The phone happily manages itself. No issue with developers or anything, the fact that the GP sees indecipherable processes in the first place or anything beyond a list of apps that he himself installed shows not that Google didn't restrict control, it shows that the GP is doing too much digging and tinkering rather than just using their device.

Now Android is in the completely expected position of trying to lock things down without breaking half the apps on the app store.
Again it's nothing of the sort. Android has handled this issue just fine for years. The problem is idiots telling people they need to micromanage their OS causing people to expect to have the micromanagement handed to them on a silver platter which leads to OEMs developing their custom garbage and utterly pointless systems which have a negative impact on the device.
The advice to force kill backgrounded apps for battery life has been wrong for 10 years, that hasn't reduced the amount of apps that are available for the express purpose of doing this.
Re:Android is a mess by ilsaloving · 2019-01-15 06:07 · Score: 1

Except that they *haven't* handled it "just fine for years". If it had been, then "idiots" wouldn't have been going around saying that they needed to micromanage their device.
I mean, seriously, you are so utterly wrong that I can only assume that you posted for the express purpose of starting an argument.
There are plenty of examples of random apps that run uncontrolled background processes that utterly destroy battery life. Hell, some of those apps are installed by the *manufacturer*, such as the suite of bullshit that Samsung installs (or at least used to, don't know if they still do) on their phones. So no, micromanaging your phone *is* necessary. A user that doesn't have the skill to manage their phone will simply return their phone, claim it's broken, and get a different one, lather rinse repeat.
Having background processes killed automatically is the expected result of developers not doing a good enough job of handling the process management themselves.
Why is it that iOS doesn't have this problem? Because iOS doesn't grant virtually unlimited access of resources to background processes. People may have a lot of complains about iOS, but having to micromanage their devices because of shitty apps is not one of those things.
Re:Android is a mess by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 11:31 · Score: 1

Except that they *haven't* handled it "just fine for years". If it had been, then "idiots" wouldn't have been going around saying that they needed to micromanage their device.
No they literally have. "idiots" saying that people need to micromanage the device kind of says it all. Only "idiots" say that. The reality is there are plenty of articles out there and studies that show killing background apps actually consumes MORE battery due to the OS unloading it from cache as a result. But like a lot of IT things when dumbed down to a level where lifehacker.com will write a shitty article about it, actual logic does not apply.

There are plenty of examples of random apps that run uncontrolled background processes that utterly destroy battery life.
Yeah random apps do. Usually those loaded with malware. Pretty much never any of the apps you find the majority of devices actually running. Surprise!

Having background processes killed automatically is the expected result of developers not doing a good enough job of handling the process management themselves.
Except developers do this just fine. Just because bitcoin mining malware exists do you expect windows to kill every process that isn't currently showing an icon in the taskbar? No that would be as stupid as it sounds.

Why is it that iOS doesn't have this problem?

iOS DOES have that problem. There's just as many articles and false advice about closing shit on iOS as there is on Android. Hell the whole practice of turning half the features of your phone off for perceived battery life started with iOS as did the notion of having to manually close apps from the task view.
Know why people don't micromanage apps on iOS? They can't, and let's face it there's less actual malware on the App Store. But the sad reality is you pick a random phone on the street and you're almost certain to not find a background task running where killing it would somehow benefit the battery without actively removing a function the user depends on, save for occasional malware.
Now when was the last time you defragmented your RAM? Programs for that exist so it must be necessary to do right?

i do that myself to my phone by FudRucker · 2019-01-14 04:18 · Score: 1

i have a Samsung Galaxy S9 Plus and i disabled facebook, and a few other non-essential things i dont use, and on top of that when i dont need to use a full featured smartphone i set the battery saver to maximum which disabled everything except for phone & text, which makes most the apps inaccessible and that is fine with me most the time, i can always turn the battery saver mode off when i need to use a full featured phone, then switch back to max battery saver mode when i am done

--
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing

Re:We could have had a healthy phone eco system by Chrisq · 2019-01-14 04:21 · Score: 2

But you had to suck the green robot's cock.

I for one welcome our green robot cock, sorry, uhm I mean overlords.

Re:Indeed by Chrisq · 2019-01-14 04:22 · Score: 1

On Huawai phones you can set an app's power saving options and allow it to run in background, run at start-up etc. It's a bit hidden in the menus but it can be done.

What you want vs everyone else by sjbe · 2019-01-14 04:22 · Score: 2, Interesting

Smaller and thicker phones with a decently thick battery.

Ok, that is what YOU want. That has little reflection on what everyone else might want. I don't need a smaller phone (I like the size of the iPhone X) but I wouldn't object to the battery being thicker and it having a better camera. But that is what I want and you might feel differently. Some people want a tablet sized phone for some reason (bad eyesight, showing off, just like big screens, etc) and that's their right.

Personally I'm fine with the base phone being thin provided they make an actually decent battery case which nobody has so far. Every battery case I've seen to date has been a clumsy and ugly hack, including the ones the OEMs make (looking at you Apple). They could actually put real functions into the case besides padding and a battery but to date no phone maker seems interested in bothering.

Re:What you want vs everyone else by Solandri · 2019-01-14 05:29 · Score: 1

That's exactly what the Moto Mods are for the Motorola Z phones. I'd argue those phones are actually more awkward without a mod. Unfortunately, that ecosphere seems to be dying, as pretty much all battery manufacturers have ceased making battery Moto Mods.
Re:What you want vs everyone else by AvitarX · 2019-01-14 06:21 · Score: 1

The bod batteries were pretty non-compelling.
They already had decent battery life and the mod only was a tiny bit extra.

--
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Re:What you want vs everyone else by AvitarX · 2019-01-14 07:23 · Score: 1

I guess they got better and I look dumb.
I see a 2.2k and a 3.5k now.
When I was first looking, I swear they were like 1200, and it seemed pointless. The true zoom camera was a disappointment too.

--
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Re:What you want vs everyone else by Dixie_Flatline · 2019-01-14 10:56 · Score: 1

The Apple battery case is shaped like that for 2 reasons:
1) Because it moves the battery out of the way of the antenna. This is the primary reason.
2) It makes the phone easier to hold (kinda like a pop-socket, but uglier and always there)
It's one of Apple's few forays into the realm of function with almost no regard to form. Or in this case, the form is part of the function, but the form looks like hell.

Moto seems to be good by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2019-01-14 04:23 · Score: 3, Insightful

I think it is time to buy only phones that are "Android One" compatible. According to Google, these phones must use stock android with absolutely no modification. And Google will update them without going through the manufacturer.

Not surprised Nokia being the leader. It is owned by Microsoft now, and Microsoft will always game every benchmark.

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

Re:Moto seems to be good by unrealmp3 · 2019-01-14 04:42 · Score: 1

And that said, I'd still get an Android One phone over many other devices. (sorry, I wasn't signed in my previous comment.
Re:Moto seems to be good by itsme1234 · 2019-01-14 04:45 · Score: 2

I think you kind of shot yourself in the foot at every step. The Nokia we're talking about here (the one making Android phones) has nothing to do with the one sold to Microsoft (making Windows Phones and earlier feature phones). This Nokia's commitment is to "clean Android" and all their phones worth considering have Android One, I haven't seen anything else. If you look at https://www.android.com/one/ they are by far the manufacturer with the largest number of models, 7 (while most are missing or have one or two lost phones there).
Re:Moto seems to be good by unrealmp3 · 2019-01-14 04:52 · Score: 1

Which shouldn't matter when you get an Android One device, but the spirit of Android One doesn't seem well thought out or gives too much leeway to manufacturers.
Re:Moto seems to be good by OneHundredAndTen · 2019-01-14 05:47 · Score: 1

Not surprised Nokia being the leader. It is owned by Microsoft now, and Microsoft will always game every benchmark.
Microsoft sold Nokia a few years ago.
Re:Moto seems to be good by RevRagnarok · 2019-01-14 07:16 · Score: 1

My Moto X4 does something similar tho... the camera app will forcibly kill ALL other apps. Including the app that launched the camera! So if I want to attach a picture to a text, I click add, choose the camera, and then when I take a picture, it drops back to my launcher. And that even takes a second or two to load. So then my text is gone.

--
I should put something clever here. Maybe someday.
Re:Moto seems to be good by Jdodge99 · 2019-01-14 08:36 · Score: 1

That's funny! Nokia and microsoft split back in 2014/2015 -- Nokia phones are now "Android One" android phones.

So what do we want? by Registered+Coward+v2 · 2019-01-14 04:33 · Score: 3, Insightful

An open OS that manufacturers can tailor or a standard one controlled by one company to ensure compatibility?

Manufacturers not letting apps run in the background doing who knows what or allowing them and not having background processes top unexpectedly?

--
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.

Re:I'm fine with this by Goose+In+Orbit · 2019-01-14 04:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

What about scheduled backups?

Titanium Backup fails to run any scheduled tasks on my handset - unless the battery "optimisation" for it is turned off... ...run it manually, and it's fine...

Re:Urbandroid sucks at app developement by unrealmp3 · 2019-01-14 04:43 · Score: 1

To be fair, I had some edge cases where Google Play Services itself would be a battery drain without being able to tell the root cause.

Re:I'm fine with this by itsme1234 · 2019-01-14 05:12 · Score: 1

Your garbage is someone's else treasure. There are alarms, countdown timers, app notifications (including chat clients), music/audiobook players, step counters and many more. If you want to use your phone as a mobile phone from 20 years ago combined with a desktop computer from 20 years ago fine, but not everybody wants that. And the solution for you is simple: just don't install any apps. The solution "let's kill everything in 20 minutes" even if the user installed let's say vlc and is playing something because you just want to do calls and texts with a phone seems to be extremely poor on many levels.

Stupid smartphone vendors by OneHundredAndTen · 2019-01-14 05:40 · Score: 1

They have to add their bloat and junk, most of the time doing it poorly to boot. Samsung is the prime example - it would seem that the Samsung software people do their best to ruin the Samsung hardware. Which is one of the reasons why I am not likely to ever buy a Samsung phone, and also why I have advised those in my circle not to buy a Samsung phone.

Android ist running into the same problems... by joh · 2019-01-14 05:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

...that Apple tried to avoid to begin with in iOS: Once you allow apps to run in the background, more and more apps want to do that and the bottom line is that the phone is busy all the time and sucks your battery dry and nobody knows why.

Apple was quite drastic and just didn't allow background tasks with very few exceptions: VoiceIP apps, chat apps and audio apps, also apps are allowed to finish tasks (like downloads) they began while they were in the foreground for max. 5 minutes. Some people think this is too strict, but the sweet spot is somewhere between "no background tasks at all" and "whatever, let apps do what they want", with both extremes probably being utterly wrong.

You won't find a solution that will satisfy everyone, but as soon as you have phone manufacturers putting up their own policies and hacks nobody knows what will happen with his app when and why and under which Android version. The fact that they seem to NEED their own hacks seems to indicate that Google didn't really solve this problem with Android.

Re:Android ist running into the same problems... by thegarbz · 2019-01-15 02:33 · Score: 1

...that Apple tried to avoid to begin with in iOS
They also tried to avoid copy and paste, and any form of multitasking. That doesn't make it right.

Once you allow apps to run in the background, more and more apps want to do that and the bottom line is that the phone is busy all the time and sucks your battery dry and nobody knows why.
Except that's not the issue here. There are many legitimate reasons to have to run in the background. There's also the reality that Android manages this just fine. The problem is the users thinking because they see something they expect that there is automatically a drain on their system. Then after spending an entire day in a low service zone, or staring at their own screen they see their battery hasn't lasted and then attempt to find a witch to drown.
Marketing this incorrectly has resulted in an expectation for a shiny interface that says it's doing some killing (along with the many apps that you can download for this purpose, stupidly enough many of which will offer a widget which ... runs in the background).
It's user ignorance, driven by media, causing marketing departments to ask engineering for stupidity.
There are no hacks needed. There hasn't been for 5+ years. Now don't forget to defragment your RAM so your computer runs faster.
Re:Android ist running into the same problems... by Mr_Silver · 2019-01-15 22:33 · Score: 1

...that Apple tried to avoid to begin with in iOS: Once you allow apps to run in the background, more and more apps want to do that and the bottom line is that the phone is busy all the time and sucks your battery dry and nobody knows why.
I remember the days of PocketPC where Microsoft wrestled with the same issue.
They allows pretty much everything to run in the background - which was not helped by the fact that the close button didn't actually close an app. Instead the operating system was supposed to "intelligently" manage load and the killing of apps. Not surprisingly it was rubbish at it so your PocketPC would often slow down to a crawl because of all the background apps running.
Apple learned from that mistake, Google did not.
(side note: To get around it people would install apps such as WisBar which would turn the close button into one that really did close)

--
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.

LineageOS by nightfire-unique · 2019-01-14 06:56 · Score: 1

The absolute best thing that could happen in the Android space is LineageOS becoming a single-click installation operation. Alarmingly, many bootloaders are locked at the factory, and the situation seems to be getting worse.

I do hope bootloader locking becomes illegal as part of right-to-repair legislation being drafted worldwide.

--
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC

Re: LineageOS by c6gunner · 2019-01-14 10:27 · Score: 1

Yeah, these days the first thing I look at when deciding on a new phone is whether or not the bootloader can be unlocked. I don't care how good every other aspect of the phone is; if I can't unlock the bootloader, I'm not interested.

KeePass2Android by macraig · 2019-01-14 06:59 · Score: 1

I'd like to be able to keep my KeePass database handy when it's needed without having to stop and waste half a minute regaining access to it, but Android insists on randomly killing the app in the background when it's doing nothing but occasionally verifying database sync. There's nothing explicit, I get no notification, it just quietly gets terminated. The author has acknowledged the problem from a usability standpoint, but apparently can do nothing to prevent it.

There should - MUST - be a way for me to designate mission-critical processes that should never die, not have the OS killing them at its whim.

Re:Fandroids be bawwwinf. by bn-7bc · 2019-01-14 07:27 · Score: 1

In the interrest of fairness All Iphones are (at least advertised as) premium phones, so lets compare like with like. Do premium Android phones lose their value as quicly as the cheaper once? Ii’m not defebding Android manufacturers , Alphabet or Apple each party have plenty of resourperces for doing that them selves, I’m just asking

Re:You don't think the OS is made by developers to by ilsaloving · 2019-01-14 08:46 · Score: 1

The calibre of skill required to make a functioning operating system is just a little bit higher than the skill required to slap together a fart app.

Re: Fandroids be bawwwinf. by c6gunner · 2019-01-14 09:57 · Score: 1

Well, the LG V20 when brand new sold for about $700 on average. Two and a half years later you can pick up a refurbished one for $120-$200.

So, obviously the guy is full of shit when he rants about them being "worthless" after 2 years, but no they do not hold value as well as iphones.

Personally I like it that way. I've found that by buying a 1-2 year old android phone and replacing all the factory bloat with LineageOS (or a similar slimmed-down ROM) I end up with a phone that is better in most ways than it would have been when brand new at a cost of about a quarter of what I would spend for a new phone.

You can't do that kind of thing with apple devices. If you buy a used iPhone you are getting dated hardware running stock software (if you're lucky; maybe instead of stock you have a special apple patch which slows down old devices) and you have zero ability to improve it in any way. Plus you're paying double for the privilege.

Re:I'm fine with this by Goose+In+Orbit · 2019-01-14 12:15 · Score: 1

I'd agree ... this has only been an issue since Pie came out.

Whatever Google did is (to put it mildly) flawed...

Optimization might delay cron jobs by tepples · 2019-01-15 07:06 · Score: 1

a better designed OS would allow you to schedule events in the future rather than running a sleeping service. When the time is reached, the OS would call your program with whatever parameters you specified.

Sort of like cron. However, a battery optimization app might default to delaying an app's cron jobs until charging has begun.

Slashdot Mirror

Top Android Phone Makers Are Killing Useful Background Processes and Breaking 3rd-Party Apps To 'Superficially Improve' Battery Life, Developers Allege (dontkillmyapp.com)

91 of 162 comments (clear)