On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 10:17 -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Esben Damgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But for some more hardcore stuff: You shouldn't have to close programs. > > This is not good usability. Instead give the option, but if we run out > > of ram, the OS should close the oldest program. But then a program > > should be able to say to the OS that the program is meant to be running > > for a long time.. Or maybe this is a bad idea.. > > I suggested that a long time ago: the important thing is not closing > the current app, but getting back to the main menu. It should work > more like PalmOS, because the user doesn't usually care in what state > the current app is, he only cares which one he's going to run next.
I think most of us have agreed that this is definitely the way to go, but until someone steps up and writes (or ports from Maemo) some kind of power policy manager, this isn't feasible. As time/resources are finite things, it would be good to have a reasonable interim solution than to just mark this as 'future' and forget about it. --Chris
