That‘s actually absolutely wrong. Urban myth stemming from days prior (Win98/XP)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Other Guy says not to do this
- Thread starter omeletpants
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is a brilliant idea; I can't work out why no-one has thought of it before.
I'm going to invent a phone for people who leave them plugged in all the time. It'll be great as I can remove the battery from it completely. I'm going to call it "land line". And as you're at home, to save tech duplication I'll remove all smart features as you can simply use your laptop instead.
I’m using the - probably older but still supported- Pro version of their app. It has a dark mode and no ads and a very minimalist interface compared to a web browser.
Screenshot from 12PM attached.
Thank you. This is neat!
Actually iOS manages what apps are open and running and if needed will will close the app out for you if needed based on available memory and how long the app has been open and running.
You actually shutdown your phone each day?
Last edited:
Like most stuff on YouTube I’m guessing the main motivation is getting attention and views.
?? I'm not an old iPhone user (just started using it in early 2020), and I already know the fastest way to find an app is simply to use spotlight (swipe down from home screen, type in first few letters, done). I don't even have to know where the icon is located on my home screen.
Scrolling down the task switcher to find the apps that you want is probably not convenient. And if you clear them up, then you have to start the app from the home screen/spotlight anyway.
Os does this automagically, when your iPhone begins to slow down from all the processes and paused apps loaded into memory one should either close the app or clear system memory first than follow this idiotic video advice.
Notice how Apple has never stated what this “guy” in video states?! Hmmm.
What??? Use universal search.
I generally use the App Library or search (99% of the time, swipe down and type like 1-3 letters), but I just don't like the clutter when I occasionally go into app switcher view.
It's not logical. I don't have to be logical all the time
Bingo. It’s VERY logical to use universal search what you’ve described above.
Universal search or spotlight finds:
Contacts,
Apps,
Emails,
Pictures,
Music,
Maps locations anything and everything either on phone your iCloud or on internet.
Use in-app or content search to limit results if your search is too wide spread in results and you’re unsure the typos of content you’re expecting the results to find.
That’s not true at all. The app switcher functions exactly as described in that video. Your most recently used apps will be at the front of the app switcher. You shouldn’t be use the app switcher as an app launcher. It works great as an app switch. I’ve never closed out my apps (unless needed for a frozen app) and I’ve had iPhones for over 10 years now.
Like, I’m not going to get into an argument with you about it or anything. The facts are the facts. And if you constantly close out your apps you are draining your battery faster than if you didn’t and it’s not necessary in any way shape or form. If it’s an OCD thing or whatever, then that’s the users prerogative. But many people may not know that so it’s just a good PSA.
I just called every iPhone user and most do
you forgot to call me... but yes, I do it as well...
I don't want to accidentally hand my phone to someone else and have her see what I was looking at
I don’t accidentally give my phone to strangers.
girlfriends are not strangers, at least I hope they are not....
girlfriends are not strangers, at least I hope they are not....
Partners who dig through your stuff… need I say more?
My youngest daughter has an iPhone 7 and she has almost every app on her phone open all the time. The phone’s performance doesn’t seem affected at all and neither does the battery life. I had a good little chuckle when I saw your post.
My typing isn’t affected but deleting slows way down right at the point where it would normally start deleting words instead of letters.
How do you use the app switcher as an app launcher? By the very term, app launcher is about launching a app. So if the app has not been launched yet, how do you launch an app from the app switcher?
I mean going back several apps into the app switcher functions the same as launching the app from the home screen. I’m calling out those that use the app switcher to launch all their apps rather than using spotlight or the home screen (or app library).
Sometimes it is quicker just to use the app switcher rather than type in the name of the app. I think people get use to doing things a certain way and that way it is more efficient for them. After all, it is their device and they should be able to use it the way they see fit to do so.
And like I said, that’s fine. But they’re using it in a way that isn’t necessary to maintain apps being open and closed. It’s like owning a car and saying people can use it the way they see fit, but they never get an oil change. It’s not the way the product is meant to be used. (Not a perfect analogy, but I hope it gets my point across)
It is just one of many ways to switch between apps. Even Apple shows using the app switcher to switch to previously launched apps. Not sure why you want to impose your view on this.
Switch apps on your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch - Apple Support
Learn how to quickly switch from one app to another. Then when you switch back, you can pick up right where you left off.
All this boils down to is the ancient notion that system up-time is limited, and that applications must be quit by a "higher intelligence" (human intervention) in order to make room for other applications.
Today's devices and OSes are built for near-100% up-time. It's expected that, like a living organism, the OS will run 24/7. Otherwise, how can the system wake for an incoming phone call, receive an incoming text, or trigger an alarm? "Sleep" time is applied to backups, managing on-device storage/shuffling surplus data to the cloud, Machine Learning/Artificial Intelligence tasks that lead to accurately predicted app/data "suggestions" and scarily-good selections of photos for machine-curated albums. Geez, my Watch knows that at around lunchtime on workdays I'll want to run a 58-minute timer.
Today, the difference between quitting an app and leaving it running mostly comes down to "saved state" - that saved state is not stored in RAM, it's shuffled off to fast, Flash storage along with the rest of the app's code and data. While Flash is still much slower than RAM, it's fast enough (especially when on an SoC) that RAM requirements are substantially reduced (hence the A-series chips' relatively small amount of RAM) - less code and data needs to remain RAM-resident. A force-quit of an app simply flushes the saved state and brings things back to square one. That can be useful when the current state is unstable, but so long as the current state is good, no need to flush (it's not like "saved state" has an objectionable odor).
I remember the bad old days of MS-DOS, Classic Mac OS, and Windows pre-95. The OSes and systems were unstable, hence prone to crash. We were lucky to get a full 8 hours of stable uptime. A full, nightly shut-down was mandatory to ensure a clean slate in the morning (of course, we had to remember to Save before shutdown). There were insufficient system resources to constantly auto-save, so when there was a crash or a powerline hiccup, much could be lost. The notion of automatically re-opening all apps and documents after either a crash or an orderly shutdown was inconceivable.
But that changed when Unix-like OSes moved from mainframes and engineering workstations to garden-variety PCs, and inexpensive systems became sufficiently powerful and sophisticated that they could deliver weeks (or more) of reliable up-time, with enough system overhead to allow for continual auto-save/saved state. We began to take for granted that a system could crash but we could still resume work right where we left off.
Up-time is so good that the monthly free software update may be the only time a system is restarted. Those who prefer to avoid updates undoubtedly have to restart anyway. It's worth wondering what percentage of those who complain about the poor performance of their old phones have simply gone a few months without a restart.
OSes keep getting better and better at maintaining uptime; better and better at recognizing unstable states and isolating (and quitting) the rogue processes underlying the instability. In the foreseeable future even major software updates won't require a restart. And while Apple TV's Foundation bears little resemblance to Asimov's (and Apple TV's version introduces a Positronic intelligence much, much earlier in the narrative), we are getting closer to the day when an artificial "mind" might outlive a human's by thousands of years, or more, without a single reboot.
Today's devices and OSes are built for near-100% up-time. It's expected that, like a living organism, the OS will run 24/7. Otherwise, how can the system wake for an incoming phone call, receive an incoming text, or trigger an alarm? "Sleep" time is applied to backups, managing on-device storage/shuffling surplus data to the cloud, Machine Learning/Artificial Intelligence tasks that lead to accurately predicted app/data "suggestions" and scarily-good selections of photos for machine-curated albums. Geez, my Watch knows that at around lunchtime on workdays I'll want to run a 58-minute timer.
Today, the difference between quitting an app and leaving it running mostly comes down to "saved state" - that saved state is not stored in RAM, it's shuffled off to fast, Flash storage along with the rest of the app's code and data. While Flash is still much slower than RAM, it's fast enough (especially when on an SoC) that RAM requirements are substantially reduced (hence the A-series chips' relatively small amount of RAM) - less code and data needs to remain RAM-resident. A force-quit of an app simply flushes the saved state and brings things back to square one. That can be useful when the current state is unstable, but so long as the current state is good, no need to flush (it's not like "saved state" has an objectionable odor).
I remember the bad old days of MS-DOS, Classic Mac OS, and Windows pre-95. The OSes and systems were unstable, hence prone to crash. We were lucky to get a full 8 hours of stable uptime. A full, nightly shut-down was mandatory to ensure a clean slate in the morning (of course, we had to remember to Save before shutdown). There were insufficient system resources to constantly auto-save, so when there was a crash or a powerline hiccup, much could be lost. The notion of automatically re-opening all apps and documents after either a crash or an orderly shutdown was inconceivable.
But that changed when Unix-like OSes moved from mainframes and engineering workstations to garden-variety PCs, and inexpensive systems became sufficiently powerful and sophisticated that they could deliver weeks (or more) of reliable up-time, with enough system overhead to allow for continual auto-save/saved state. We began to take for granted that a system could crash but we could still resume work right where we left off.
Up-time is so good that the monthly free software update may be the only time a system is restarted. Those who prefer to avoid updates undoubtedly have to restart anyway. It's worth wondering what percentage of those who complain about the poor performance of their old phones have simply gone a few months without a restart.
OSes keep getting better and better at maintaining uptime; better and better at recognizing unstable states and isolating (and quitting) the rogue processes underlying the instability. In the foreseeable future even major software updates won't require a restart. And while Apple TV's Foundation bears little resemblance to Asimov's (and Apple TV's version introduces a Positronic intelligence much, much earlier in the narrative), we are getting closer to the day when an artificial "mind" might outlive a human's by thousands of years, or more, without a single reboot.