Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
efjay

7 app background limit in Windows 8?

36 posts in this topic

However, it's a relevant limitation. There isn't any practical limit to the number of applications on the Windows taskbar, yet the situation is very different when you jump into WinRT apps - it's a very low limit at that. It irritates me that Microsoft opted to implement a second taskbar just for Metro apps and to have it hidden by default, along with the aforementioned limitations. It really does seem bolted on.

Ugh ... the switcher is not really meant as a counterpoint to the taskbar, in that it's a shortcut to get to "recent" apps not "running" apps. Think of it like the little arrow next to the Back button in Windows/File Explorer, or the address bar of a web browser, showing recent history. But this gets to one of my pet peeves in that I'm not sure the switcher should even have been added at all as it just confuses things - the Start screen is a better way to switch apps most of the time. The switcher is useful as a way of snapping apps, but there should be a better way of snapping apps from the start screen anyway, so ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you need more than a couple Metro applications actually running full time? The number of programs that actually need to be running 100% of the time isn't that great and would work perfectly fine with scheduled updates/notifications. Media players, torrent clients, etc sure. But for the vast majority of Metro applications, not really.. 99% of the time they're waiting on you to do something anyway or run functions at scheduled times.. they wake up, do their thing and go back to sleep again.

They don't allow any MetroApp to run in the background and only allow scheduled tasks to do so. For them to put any limit on the desktop is a joke. I don't think my Quad Core + HyperThreading i7 with 16GB of RAM and an SSD would even feel the impact of the apps running 24/7 or the background tasks running just as long.

Those limits are fine on my cellphone where the increased activity = battery drain. No such scenario exists on my PC here at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't allow any MetroApp to run in the background and only allow scheduled tasks to do so. For them to put any limit on the desktop is a joke. I don't think my Quad Core + HyperThreading i7 with 16GB of RAM and an SSD would even feel the impact of the apps running 24/7 or the background tasks running just as long.

Those limits are fine on my cellphone where the increased activity = battery drain. No such scenario exists on my PC here at home.

Actually one of the most common performance problems people hit on desktop PCs is "runaway" apps. The new model goes a long way to preventing exactly this problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually one of the most common performance problems people hit on desktop PCs is "runaway" apps. The new model goes a long way to preventing exactly this problem.

I don't know if you're being serious or not here... You're seriously suggesting that we shouldn't be allowed to run more than one app at a time on Quad Core CPUs with HT (which effectively handle 8 threads at a time)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hypervisors

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, depending on your resolution even the taskbar has a limit on how many things it can show, just like the new metro switcher does. When people who went on about the start screen were told to just pin things they use the most to the taskbar they snapped back saying that they don't have enough space there for everything. Metro apps will work in the background on their schedule regardless of if they're added to the lock screen or show up in the switcher unless the system needs more RAM and then they get paged out or closed.

As some have said I think people are mixing things up here, the limits on what you can add to your lock screen are different from the limits of how many apps can show up in the switcher and so on. In the end the apps should all just work, in the background, regardless. The only difference is if they're running on a schedule or if you're on a desktop without battery constraints and they just run normally when they have to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if you're being serious or not here... You're seriously suggesting that we shouldn't be allowed to run more than one app at a time on Quad Core CPUs with HT (which effectively handle 8 threads at a time)?

I never suggested anything of the sort. What makes you think I did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If background apps only get 1-2 CPU seconds per 15 minutes, how come there are music streaming apps that run just fine in the background? Is that enough for them, or is there something else I'm missing?

I thought metro apps could only be in focus, suspended, or not running. And suspended (background apps) only got very little CPU time allotted to them for push notifications and such.

Anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If background apps only get 1-2 CPU seconds per 15 minutes, how come there are music streaming apps that run just fine in the background? Is that enough for them, or is there something else I'm missing?

I thought metro apps could only be in focus, suspended, or not running. And suspended (background apps) only got very little CPU time allotted to them for push notifications and such.

Anyone?

there are certain scenarios when background stuff is permitted and theres a part of the API for that. This includes background audio and background downloading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never suggested anything of the sort. What makes you think I did?

I thinks he thought you were talking about the limitation of the number of background tasks running at once to mean number of apps. To be clear, what Brandon is referring to is the new the app Lifecycle management where apps are suspended when you navigate away from them. This means apps are consuming NO resources when not present other than memory which uses the same amount of power regardless if their is meaningful data occupying it. Because of this, minimized apps will not run rampant on your system affecting battery life or performance. As memory becomes scarce, Windows will close apps as needed to reclaim memory (this is why you no longer have to close apps.) Again, Windows places no restriction on the number apps running at once.

Apps can get special permissions to run short tasks in the background in a controlled manner, as others have mentioned which allows them update live tiles, downloads, play music, notifications, and such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there are certain scenarios when background stuff is permitted and theres a part of the API for that. This includes background audio and background downloading.

Also, while 2 seconds doesn't seem like a lot, it actually is a lot of time to a really fast CPU. The seconds don't have to be continuous, but can be spread out as needed. Most of the time the app just needs short bursts (say 10 milliseconds) and then goes dormant for a bit, another short burst, then dormant...and so on.

Playing audio is a special case. Usually CPUs or GPUs have hardware decoders anyway which are extremely efficient so the extra time needed won't affect battery life much.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.