Task Killers... The Answer from Google & Developers.

[ffej89]

I agree totally. I do use system panel but never to kill apps. Not true, i do use system just to monitor my phone but if their is an app that is using an unusual amount of cpu i will kill that single app. Have only had to do that maybe a few times though.

Nice article but i'm afraid for the mass of killers out there you will never convince them they will Kill Kill Kill lol

 

[SGTiger]

I have many apps that use the GPS. Though infrequently, I sometimes notice the GPS is on when it doesn't need to be. Of course this is sucking battery like no tomorrow. Sure is nice to have a task manager to bring up a list so I can quickly see and kill those that use the GPS.

Additionally I have LauncherPro which is working perfectly... NOW. I had tried every setting in LP and even gave up on it and went to ADW for a short time because LP would redraw the screen every time after using two or three apps. Once I took others' advice to install Minfree, I have NOT HAD ONE redraw for over a week with constant usage.

I hate the multitude of real generalized posts that ALL task/mem managers are useless.

 

[dmo580]

I'd like to mention my own few cents about this. I know a lot of the top dawgs here at DroidForums don't believe in task killers and there were many posts where people just kept quoting/linking in almost troll-like fashion anytime someone asked something about task killers. I'm glad many of you believe in that, but if you look at the serious discussion going on Reddit today and some threads on XDA, you will see that the community is still quite split. It's not a definitive YES or NO answer.

Google tells you you don't need one just like Apple told us we don't need multitasking and Microsoft tells us we don't need copy and paste in Windows Phone 7. You know why? Honestly, I do understand how Android is supposed to work. When developers code their apps the proper way and Android is working 100% efficiently, you will see memory allocation at its best. You have to realize that people who have used task killers have admitted that Android's done a better and better job from 2.0 to 2.0.1 to 2.1 and then to 2.2. So this means that Google has already stepped up its game. If they now say you don't need one at 2.2, then does that mean all you troll posters who kept saying you don't need one since the days of 2.0 were wrong? I mean clearly there's been improvement right? So something justifies using it.

It's just like launchers. Remember when Helix first came out? Everyone said "OMG FASTEST THING EVAR." Then 1.4b came out (for those who paid) and people were like ZOMGZOMGZOMG SO MUCH FASTER. Okay? So when people whined that the original was slow compared to the iPhone and others said STFU, what did they say when 1.4b came out? Everyone said "well this new one is so much faster." Then LauncherPro came out. That became the new fastest thing. So what? Helix is like a turtle now compared to LP. Was it wrong to whine back then? Like I said, there's room for improvement.

The same goes with memory management. No one can say Android is flawless. Coupled with the fact that developers aren't flawless either. I know many of you have experienced flawed apps or rogue apps that go on infinite loops. Heck the stock browser has done it to me. Speedtest.net has done it to me with the GPS constantly searching for a location because there's no Exit button and I'm in a large building with no GPS signal indoors. So I drained 30% battery in a mere 15 min or something.

The point I'm trying to make here is that Google wants us to believe that Android should be able to do it all. Just like Apple wants us to believe you don't need TRUE multitasking to get things done. Obviously Apple's OS 3.0 only did half the trick with push notifications which is why iOS 4 adds so much more. And Android sees this from its memory management perspective too. New Android builds are constantly trying to upgrade this. But to say its perfect as it is now and does not need human intervention is ridiculous.

Task killers have their place. Just like overclocking a computer does. You could say 99% of people don't need to overclock their computers. It just wastes power and creates extra heat. You know those typical gamers who just buy "fast" computers and now everything comes with an Easy button for overclocking. Do you really need that for Starcraft II? For someone like me who's a member of XtremeSystems forums where people do some crazy liquid nitrogen setups, I spend days reading boards, talking to people, understanding optimum memory timings and voltages as different sticks of RAM made by different manufacturers, and even different batches have different optimum settings. It takes a long time to nail that out. Yeah, i might not HAVE a legit reason to overclock but its my hobby. I enjoy it. I tend to think the rest of the world who just hits an easy button as its the cool thing to do now has no reason to do it.... on top of the 98% of the world who doesn't even know what overclocking is.

To me, if you're not willing to understand something, yeah there could be a reason why you don't need to do it. But does this mean I should tell gamers who don't raelly understand the art of overclocking NOT to overclock? Does this mean people who don't spend everyday in their garage inside their car shouldn't buy fast cars and nice cars? No. They just aren't getting the full experience of it all, but it doesn't mean people don't benefit.

The same goes with task killers. A newb might get one thinking itll triple battery life or free up CPU cycles. But in truth maybe only memory is being freed up as none of those apps are really consuming CPU cycles. Once in a while he'll catch a rogue app and think that it made a world of difference because without one he might run out of battery in 10 minutes. You're absolutely right when some apps really just load into memory and this is not the same thing as eating CPU cycles. Sometimes task killers use more power than the app loaded in memory does. This is why it takes research and understanding of the OS and apps to figure this out. But a task killer on idle used for manual killing won't eat that much power will it? I'm sure if you just use it once a week to kill a rogue app, it'll use far less power idling than sending and receiving 2-3 text messages will use up. So really, does it hurt?

I'd also like to point out LauncherPro already pushes the limits of Android memory management. There are tweaks and hacks here and there to get the screen to stay persistent so it doesn't need to reload the widgets. This launcher that so many of you embrace as godlike already tweaks with Android memory settings. And here you are saying Google knows best and that Android has already been setup to accommodate every user. No, it's not setup perfectly.

And this is why you can use a task killer. For 99% of us, yeah, Android on its own will be fine, but for those of you who care and know what you're doing, you could see a difference. Just be sure you know WTF you're doing. But the answer isn't "NO DO NOT USE A TASK KILLER THEY ARE USELESS." or "YES OMG IT MAKES MY PHONE FAST 24/7." KNow the drawbacks and benefits before you make a sweeping general statement.

 

[BayouFlyFisher]

I'd like to mention my own few cents about this. I know a lot of the top dawgs here at DroidForums don't believe in task killers and there were many posts where people just kept quoting/linking in almost troll-like fashion anytime someone asked something about task killers. I'm glad many of you believe in that, but if you look at the serious discussion going on Reddit today and some threads on XDA, you will see that the community is still quite split. It's not a definitive YES or NO answer.

Google tells you you don't need one just like Apple told us we don't need multitasking and Microsoft tells us we don't need copy and paste in Windows Phone 7. You know why? Honestly, I do understand how Android is supposed to work. When developers code their apps the proper way and Android is working 100% efficiently, you will see memory allocation at its best. You have to realize that people who have used task killers have admitted that Android's done a better and better job from 2.0 to 2.0.1 to 2.1 and then to 2.2. So this means that Google has already stepped up its game. If they now say you don't need one at 2.2, then does that mean all you troll posters who kept saying you don't need one since the days of 2.0 were wrong? I mean clearly there's been improvement right? So something justifies using it.

It's just like launchers. Remember when Helix first came out? Everyone said "OMG FASTEST THING EVAR." Then 1.4b came out (for those who paid) and people were like ZOMGZOMGZOMG SO MUCH FASTER. Okay? So when people whined that the original was slow compared to the iPhone and others said STFU, what did they say when 1.4b came out? Everyone said "well this new one is so much faster." Then LauncherPro came out. That became the new fastest thing. So what? Helix is like a turtle now compared to LP. Was it wrong to whine back then? Like I said, there's room for improvement.

The same goes with memory management. No one can say Android is flawless. Coupled with the fact that developers aren't flawless either. I know many of you have experienced flawed apps or rogue apps that go on infinite loops. Heck the stock browser has done it to me. Speedtest.net has done it to me with the GPS constantly searching for a location because there's no Exit button and I'm in a large building with no GPS signal indoors. So I drained 30% battery in a mere 15 min or something.

The point I'm trying to make here is that Google wants us to believe that Android should be able to do it all. Just like Apple wants us to believe you don't need TRUE multitasking to get things done. Obviously Apple's OS 3.0 only did half the trick with push notifications which is why iOS 4 adds so much more. And Android sees this from its memory management perspective too. New Android builds are constantly trying to upgrade this. But to say its perfect as it is now and does not need human intervention is ridiculous.

Task killers have their place. Just like overclocking a computer does. You could say 99% of people don't need to overclock their computers. It just wastes power and creates extra heat. You know those typical gamers who just buy "fast" computers and now everything comes with an Easy button for overclocking. Do you really need that for Starcraft II? For someone like me who's a member of XtremeSystems forums where people do some crazy liquid nitrogen setups, I spend days reading boards, talking to people, understanding optimum memory timings and voltages as different sticks of RAM made by different manufacturers, and even different batches have different optimum settings. It takes a long time to nail that out. Yeah, i might not HAVE a legit reason to overclock but its my hobby. I enjoy it. I tend to think the rest of the world who just hits an easy button as its the cool thing to do now has no reason to do it.... on top of the 98% of the world who doesn't even know what overclocking is.

To me, if you're not willing to understand something, yeah there could be a reason why you don't need to do it. But does this mean I should tell gamers who don't raelly understand the art of overclocking NOT to overclock? Does this mean people who don't spend everyday in their garage inside their car shouldn't buy fast cars and nice cars? No. They just aren't getting the full experience of it all, but it doesn't mean people don't benefit.

The same goes with task killers. A newb might get one thinking itll triple battery life or free up CPU cycles. But in truth maybe only memory is being freed up as none of those apps are really consuming CPU cycles. Once in a while he'll catch a rogue app and think that it made a world of difference because without one he might run out of battery in 10 minutes. You're absolutely right when some apps really just load into memory and this is not the same thing as eating CPU cycles. Sometimes task killers use more power than the app loaded in memory does. This is why it takes research and understanding of the OS and apps to figure this out. But a task killer on idle used for manual killing won't eat that much power will it? I'm sure if you just use it once a week to kill a rogue app, it'll use far less power idling than sending and receiving 2-3 text messages will use up. So really, does it hurt?

I'd also like to point out LauncherPro already pushes the limits of Android memory management. There are tweaks and hacks here and there to get the screen to stay persistent so it doesn't need to reload the widgets. This launcher that so many of you embrace as godlike already tweaks with Android memory settings. And here you are saying Google knows best and that Android has already been setup to accommodate every user. No, it's not setup perfectly.

And this is why you can use a task killer. For 99% of us, yeah, Android on its own will be fine, but for those of you who care and know what you're doing, you could see a difference. Just be sure you know WTF you're doing. But the answer isn't "NO DO NOT USE A TASK KILLER THEY ARE USELESS." or "YES OMG IT MAKES MY PHONE FAST 24/7." KNow the drawbacks and benefits before you make a sweeping general statement.

Nuh uh!!!!

 

[Martin030908]

CK.... I wanted to get a fresh thread that was more of a "link to:" information on the subject

dmo580. Check the updated OP with information from developer cvpcs regarding some common Android myths.

 

[geetarspaz]

i dont use any task-killing apps out there. my battery lasts about 1.5 days of heavy use. the phone manages memory and battery fine. with my first droid i owned, i used a task-killing app and my battery lifespan sucked and my phone always had issues going on. plus, over half the apps you just killed with be back on/open by android naturally.

 

[SGTiger]

i dont use any task-killing apps out there. my battery lasts about 1.5 days of heavy use. the phone manages memory and battery fine. with my first droid i owned, i used a task-killing app and my battery lifespan sucked and my phone always had issues going on. plus, over half the apps you just killed with be back on/open by android naturally.

Some task killers/managers have other legitimate uses unlike the useless/detrimental "automatic" task killing feature.

 

[YankInDaSouth]

Great information here! I must admit I use an "auto-kill all" widget. I was told when I first got the phone (by another Droid user) that an app killer was an absolute necessity. So, I have become very OCD-like when it comes to tapping that widget.
After reading this I am going to try and control my obsession and monitor my phones performance/battery life and see how it goes! This may be a tough detox, but I can do it - I know I can!!!hmy:

 

[chaosdax]

I had actually been told by the Verizon manager of the rep I bought the phone from that a task killer was a must have. After reading through this, I am also going to start scaling back on my obsessive app killing and deactivate the auto-kill -- A lot of what's being said makes sense.

 

[Martin030908]

i dont use any task-killing apps out there. my battery lasts about 1.5 days of heavy use. the phone manages memory and battery fine. with my first droid i owned, i used a task-killing app and my battery lifespan sucked and my phone always had issues going on. plus, over half the apps you just killed with be back on/open by android naturally.

Some task killers/managers have other legitimate uses unlike the useless/detrimental "automatic" task killing feature.

This is true.

The Auto-Kill is the true evil.... avoid it like the plague.

Obsessively 'killing' apps is second on the list

Continue to work on the addiction people... you'll overcome

 

[Dragon3463]

That doesn't make a bit of sense? So why does the apps keeping back on their own? have never gotten a satifactory answer on that question..

 

[M.Opaliski]

Look at what Apps appear in the list, the things that you use on a regular basis, as if they're waiting for you to use them. It's a smart phone.

The designers, they're not lying, really.

*Put down the Task Killer and back away ...

 

[harrellj]

That doesn't make a bit of sense? So why does the apps keeping back on their own? have never gotten a satifactory answer on that question..

It is the way that the OS handles processes. Activity | Android Developers will probably give you the best amount of information on it. Application Fundamentals | Android Developers is more in-depth and FAQ: Why You Shouldn’t Be Using a Task Killer with Android explains it in English rather than tech There's also http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/04/multitasking-android-way.html which is closer to tech than English, but still an interesting read.

 

[aminaked]

That doesn't make a bit of sense? So why does the apps keeping back on their own? have never gotten a satifactory answer on that question..

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking, but the stock apps load into memory to give the user a faster user experience. For example, Maps loads into memory so that it is ready quickly when the user needs it. Please note that apps sitting idly in memory basically use no CPU/battery so don't worry about them. If android needs more memory, it will quickly clear itself some space.

That being said, when done with Maps return to your home screen so that the GPS shuts off. When done with Navigation, choose Exit from the menu so that GPS turns off. Some apps you install will keep running and use resources, but these are the 2 stock apps that seem to need special treatment.

 

[aldaudio]

i used to also kill apps, but not so much anymore. i can still only get about 10 hours battery life, tho im texting a lot and surfing the net.

when i go to see what drains my battery the most, its always the display with an over-whelming percentage, and thats with the brightness on 0.



Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk