In the short time i've been using G1, there were some instances where a task
manager could have come handy. Is there a Task Manager on the Android
Market?

take care,
Muthu Ramadoss.

http://linkedin.com/in/tellibitz +91-9840348914
http://androidrocks.in - Android Consulting.



On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Lack of protection from badly written apps is a part of life on Android
> or any open platform (look at the fun Locale caused a while ago).
>
> I'm sure that the "Force close" dialogue could be popped up if onPause
> doesn't return after a few seconds or returns with threads left active
> in the process (apart from the UI one).
>
> That should name and shame bad apps and give us a way of making things
> work.
>
> Al.
>
> Stoyan Damov wrote:
> > The only issue with this is the following:
> >
> > The OS can't just pause all threads the app has spawned because some
> > might be holding locks, others might be scrolling a database cursor,
> > writing to files, buying/selling stuff on the net, etc., etc.
> > So the OS can pause an app only after the app's onPause has returned.
> > This has 2 issues:
> > 1) malicious or buggy apps can refuse/fail to return from onPause, so
> > the OS should have some kind of a timeout and kill such apps (it
> > already has the dreaded force close/wait dialog)
> > 2) even if they return, this doesn't mean that they don't have threads
> > running in the background doing something potentially risky to kill
> > My experience is that only like 1% of all devs I know, who use threads
> > in their apps (in C++, C# and Java, i.e. language doesn't matter),
> > know how to write properly multithreaded apps, and can't implement the
> > simpliest of all operations like ensuring a thread has started or
> > stopping a thread gracefully.
> >
> > Surely Google can think about this and come up with something very
> > intriguing and innovative because I have this 1 little head, we on the
> > thread have these ~10 heads, and they have thousands of big ones ;)
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I would suggest the user pressing the Home button pauses the app until
> >> the user tries to access it again. Then the existing task management
> >> infrastructure could kill it off if necessary.
> >>
> >> I can see the main benefit of this permission being for highly
> >> interactive apps that probably don't want to keep thrashing away if the
> >> user isn't looking at their output.
> >>
> >> Al.
> >>
> >> Jondice wrote:
> >>
> >>> Perhaps creating a new permission for running apps at a "high
> >>> priority" (possibly a linux real-time priority level?) would be
> >>> useful, especially for games.
> >>>
> >>> I also agree, users should be able to kill an app if they so desire;
> >>> the alternative which many, including myself use, is to restart the
> >>> phone, which is just ridiculous.  Admittedly, it seems as though I
> >>> haven't had to do this as much lately; I guess more developers are
> >>> getting better at implementing proper lifetime procedures in their
> >>> apps.
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 9, 7:20 am, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> That's why it would be a permission the user has to agree to on
> install.
> >>>>
> >>>> To me it seems like a good idea for any platform that wants to high
> >>>> quality games to allow those games to use all the resources whilst
> >>>> they're in-play. After all, it's the norm on games consoles, and with
> >>>> the limited hardware in the G1 (as compared with a PS3 :)) it would
> make
> >>>> a lot of sense.
> >>>>
> >>>> Al.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Incognito wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> So the other one never starts? Won't this leave to unexpected
> behavior? I.e One app will block all others and not let them do their job
> without the user noticing. I.e he may not realize that he is no longer
> getting twitter messages because one app is blocking.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 7:08 AM, Stoyan Damov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is apparent which app is on top (in the foreground) - the last
> >>>>> launched one, isn't it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Incognito <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What happens if two apps are asking for the same permision?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 9, 2009, at 6:53 AM, Stoyan Damov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One can have the best of both worlds provided that the OS maker is
> >>>>> interested in providing this - for example, an app can request a
> >>>>> RUN_ALONE permission (or whatever) and the OS can do the rest - that
> >>>>> is, providing a single tasking experience on a multitasking OS should
> >>>>> not be that hard.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Tote <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On the other hand, it severely limits your opportunities on what you
> >>>>> can do on a platform, too.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mar 9, 1:18 am, Stoyan Damov <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Mark Murphy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Background processing, in all its forms, is a double-edged sword. A
> >>>>> frequent complaint lodged against iPhone is that it does not allow
> >>>>> background processing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I consider this particular iPhone's feature one of the best features
> >>>>> on any smartphone - Apple have a very good reason to not allow 2 apps
> >>>>> to run in parallel - 1 app can and will hinder the performance of the
> >>>>> other app, and as is the case with games on Android, it's quite an
> >>>>> unpleasant surprise to bust your ass to get your game drawing @ ~60
> >>>>> fps when virtual nothing else is running, and then have it draw at a
> >>>>> randomly lower rate just because another app/s is/are running as
> well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> * Written an Android App? - List it athttp://andappstore.com/*
> >>>>
> >>>> ======
> >>>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> >>>> company number  6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> >>>> 152-160 City Road, London,  EC1V 2NX, UK.
> >>>>
> >>>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> >>>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> >>>> subsidiaries.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >> --
> >>
> >> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ *
> >>
> >> ======
> >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> >> company number  6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> >> 152-160 City Road, London,  EC1V 2NX, UK.
> >>
> >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> >> subsidiaries.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ *
>
> ======
> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the
> company number  6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House,
> 152-160 City Road, London,  EC1V 2NX, UK.
>
> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not
> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's
> subsidiaries.
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to