What's the point of the new app switcher?

[Dj64Mk7]

How hard is it for people to understand that you should NOT force quit your apps? There's a reason it's called "Recent Apps" and not "Close 'Open' Apps."

For those that don't understand this, iOS has built-in memory management that freezes apps after a certain period of time, with no action on the part of the user. When you force an app to close, by swiping up on recents, that app has to be reloaded from scratch when you open it again, which uses up the battery faster than leaving the apps be.

At least that's what I understand to be the case. Please feel free to help me understand if this is incorrect information.

 

[magicman32]

I had a thread about this a week or so and I still like the old one better but my biggest gripe is, as a right handed user, the damn things still scroll the wrong way and it still messes with my mind. Someone earlier said its done right now and wrong previously. Couldn't disagree more: I look at it like its a book, meant to be used (turning pages) right to left, right to left.

At least code in a toggle so someone can switch it if they want so it's a more natural motion for a left or right handed. Though I realize some don't care or aren't bothered by it but those who are at least give them an option.

 

[C DM]

I had a thread about this a week or so and I still like the old one better but my biggest gripe is, as a right handed user, the damn things still scroll the wrong way and it still messes with my mind. Someone earlier said its done right now and wrong previously. Couldn't disagree more: I look at it like its a book, meant to be used (turning pages) left to right, left to right.

At least code in a toggle so someone can switch it if they want so it's a more natural motion for a left or right handed. Though I realize some don't care or aren't bothered by it but those who are at least give them an option.

I'm right handed and really find this way or the old way just as easy and straightforward to use. I guess an option wouldn't be a bad idea, but it's not likely that one would exist for something like that.

 

[Michael Scrip]

How hard is it for people to understand that you should NOT force quit your apps? There's a reason it's called "Recent Apps" and not "Close 'Open' Apps."

For those that don't understand this, iOS has built-in memory management that freezes apps after a certain period of time, with no action on the part of the user. When you force an app to close, by swiping up on recents, that app has to be reloaded from scratch when you open it again, which uses up the battery faster than leaving the apps be.

At least that's what I understand to be the case. Please feel free to help me understand if this is incorrect information.

If I use an app once a day at 8am... why should it sit there in the multitasking tray for the rest of the day?

I understand the science behind all this... I just don't want to see the icon in the multitasking tray when I won't use that app again for a while.

 

[Tycho24]

Seems like you overlooked quite a bit of the context in which it was all brought up and focused on one statement out of it all. At the risk of directly insulting your intelligence...that's not really how a good discussion works.

To use the logic you presented there, cars come with a horn, it's there to be used, but to be used when needed. You don't just use it randomly or every time you see someone crossing the street or anything like that. Similarly, the feature to close the app is there, but within the design of iOS it is primarily there to close out apps that are not working properly (along with a few other reasons). It doesn't mean it's there to just randomly close apps each an every time, even though you can certainly do that if you want, just like you can honk your car's horn at every stoplight.

Nope.
The op clearly said & meant - "you are NOT supposed to close out of apps".
It was not nuanced. It was quite clear. I agree that if he had said: "you should't always close out of every single app, especially if you will be relaunching it in a few moments", he would be quite correct! that is not what he said, nor meant. He said: you are not "supposed" to ever close out of apps.
That is both idiotic & preposterous. As you & I both seemingly agree on, that ability was provided by Apple so we can choose to only have a select few commonly used apps running, both for ease & battery life.
I tend to think that someone that doggedly refuses to close out of any app, even if they have a clutter of 50 apps open is just as silly as a user that refuses to leave any apps open ever.

 

[C DM]

Nope.
The op clearly said & meant - "you are NOT supposed to close out of apps".
It was not nuanced. It was quite clear. I agree that if he had said: "you should't always close out of every single app, especially if you will be relaunching it in a few moments", he would be quite correct! that is not what he said, nor meant. He said: you are not "supposed" to ever close out of apps.
That is both idiotic & preposterous. As you & I both seemingly agree on, that ability was provided by Apple so we can choose to only have a select few commonly used apps running, both for ease & battery life.
I tend to think that someone that doggedly refuses to close out of any app, even if they have a clutter of 50 apps open is just as silly as a user that refuses to leave any apps open ever.

It was said in the context of closing out all apps at once, which is different than what you are even describing, and that context is often associated with the need to do that in relation to battery/resource savings. From all of those aspects you shouldn't close out of all apps.

As for what you can do, again, sure you can do what you want, but that still doesn't mean that's what it was actually designed for (as was explained in my earlier reply and in a few replies from some others). The part about a few commonly used apps running as far as battery life goes isn't quite right either for the most part since most of them are in fact not running, again, based on how iOS is designed.

 

[Tycho24]

I'm not describing an experience, i'm describing exactly how iOS is designed. I'm sorry that the way iOS is intended to be used isn't the way you use it and that upsets you and for some reason you're blaming me for it ;-)

Lol, no reason to apologize..... =)
As you couldn't be any more wrong!!! ;0)

What you describe is most CERTAINLY an experience & not how iOS is designed.
Please feel free to peruse http://www.dictionary.com at your leisure. =P

See, iOS is designed to keep apps open in a snapshot when you hit the home button, with an option to swipe up & close any you want, any time you want.
Thus, you may CHOOSE to have the experience of having only the few that are most used open & handy (as I enjoy), or you can have every single app on your phone open at once (as you enjoy).
So..... while we are BOTH using the OS as it is designed, we have a different experience. =D

Make sense?

 

[Dj64Mk7]

If I use an app once a day at 8am... why should it sit there in the multitasking tray for the rest of the day? ... I just don't want to see the icon in the multitasking tray when I won't use that app again for a while.

This is a good point. After the app is pushed out of memory, I don't see why you couldn't 'close' it for aesthetic reasons.

 

[C DM]

Lol, no reason to apologize..... =)
As you couldn't be any more wrong!!! ;0)

What you describe is most CERTAINLY an experience & not how iOS is designed.
Please feel free to peruse http://www.dictionary.com at your leisure. =P

See, iOS is designed to keep apps open in a snapshot when you hit the home button, with an option to swipe up & close any you want, any time you want.
Thus, you may CHOOSE to have the experience of having only the few that are most used open & handy (as I enjoy), or you can have every single app on your phone open at once (as you enjoy).
So..... while we are BOTH using the OS as it is designed, we have a different experience. =D

Make sense?

Actually iOS is designed that the apps will only run for a short time in the background if needed, but that's basically it. So in most circumstances with most apps they are in fact not running. This is a fairly known part of iOS design, at least certainly around these parts.

 

[C DM]

If I use an app once a day at 8am... why should it sit there in the multitasking tray for the rest of the day?

I understand the science behind all this... I just don't want to see the icon in the multitasking tray when I won't use that app again for a while.

This is a good point. After the app is pushed out of memory, I don't see why you couldn't 'close' it for aesthetic reasons.

You are certainly free to do that for those kinds of personal subjective reasons. And the functionality to do that is there, so Apple already provided that long ago. The underlying point is that objectively and functionality there isn't some sort of a widespread useful reason to need to close all apps (as that is the part that's essentially under the discussion in relation to it all).

 

[Dj64Mk7]

The underlying point is that objectively and functionality there isn't some sort of a widespread useful reason to need to close all apps.

How in the world did it get to the point that people think doing that SAVES... something?

 

[hlfway2anywhere]

Actually iOS is designed that the apps will only run for a short time in the background if needed, but that's basically it. So in most circumstances with most apps they are in fact not running. This is a fairly known part of iOS design, at least certainly around these parts.

stop respond to him/her. There's a trend of condescending posts here.

 

[cambookpro]

Haven't really minded it until last week, and now I realise functionally it's a lot worse.

I was doing a report in Pages and plotted a few graphs, and I was trying to look at a Safari page to compare a graph plotting the same things but based on a different set of source data. If I was on iOS 8, I'd just go into multitasking and see them side by side, but in iOS 9 they are now obscured and I had to flick between each app separately. Incredibly annoying.

If I had an Air 2, I suppose I could do split screen multitasking and it would be fine. I tried slide over on my Air 1 but the horizontal width was too small to be useful, and it slid over part of the graph I wanted to look at.

 

[mcdj]

I for one didn't understand the reasoning or need for the task switcher redesign. If anything, it kind of goes against the anti-skeumorphism campaign, because it looks and feels like a fan of cards.

The most annoying thing to me in the brief time I tried the beta was that swiping up to kill an app required a much more precise vertical motion, because the strip of real estate an app is given in the switcher is so much more narrow.

I prefer the current switcher, which not only lets me swipe up much more freely across a wider space, but also let's me see the content of the screens of apps much more easily, making it visually more intuitive to find the app I want to switch to.

If I lay 10 pages of a magazine across a table in row, it's far easier to see the one I want to read than if they're in a fanned stack with only the edges showing.

The new switcher is a backwards step in terms of UI.

 

[lagwagon]

I for one didn't understand the reasoning or need for the task switcher redesign. If anything, it kind of goes against the anti-skeumorphism campaign, because it looks and feels like a fan of cards.

The most annoying thing to me in the brief time I tried the beta was that swiping up to kill an app required a much more precise vertical motion, because the strip of real estate an app is given in the switcher is so much more narrow.

I prefer the current switcher, which not only lets me swipe up much more freely across a wider space, but also let's me see the content of the screens of apps much more easily, making it visually more intuitive to find the app I want to switch to.

If I lay 10 pages of a magazine across a table in row, it's far easier to see the one I want to read than if they're in a fanned stack with only the edges showing.

The new switcher is a backwards step in terms of UI.

But the app switcher has icons above each card telling you what app it is without even having to look at the card. 10 magazines layed out doesn't.

I will agree on the area of where you can swipe up from is smaller though. For me personally that's the only thing that could count as a gripe.

 

[Laurence Eckert]

I am not a fan of the icons and the app names aligning to the top left of the card. I liked how in iOS 7 and 8, the app icon would be below the app card and would look much better.