Metro apps unable to run in the background?

[migo]

I never noticed this while using the CP and RP as there weren't enough apps to use to discover this. It seems that Metro apps just plain don't keep running in the background. For the most part, this wouldn't be an issue, but for music, it's a big problem. It makes sense for a music app to keep playing music while I've switched to something else (or even a video app, I don't really need to be watching the screen for a TED talk, for instance).

My PlayBook allows this to be changed - either all the apps constantly run, or they suspend when not in the forefront. Is there something similar squirreled away for Windows 8?

[vcfan]

apps can do certain tasks in the background. audio is one of them,so all music apps should run in the background no problem. also apps can download and upload in the background, sync, update live tiles, and you can do some custom background stuff but your resources are limited so you don't suck all the cpu power and drain the battery,for example.

[migo]

I've got a music app that suspends when in the background, so what you're saying would appear not to be the case.

Also, I don't really care about battery life or CPU usage on a desktop. That's fine for a phone which is guaranteed to not be connected to power and for which battery life is very important. It's silly not to offer a toggle option for a desktop that has upgradeable RAM and a multi-core CPU.

[zhangm Supervisor]

Default music app or third-party?

[migo]

Third party.

[GarakObama]

Well what app is it?

[jakem1]

Third party.

That app hasn't been written properly then by the sound of it.

[vcfan]

I've got a music app that suspends when in the background, so what you're saying would appear not to be the case.

then take it up with the developer then. its pure laziness. there should be no reason for it not to implement background audio. this isn't the fault of the os.

Also, I don't really care about battery life or CPU usage on a desktop. That's fine for a phone which is guaranteed to not be connected to power and for which battery life is very important. It's silly not to offer a toggle option for a desktop that has upgradeable RAM and a multi-core CPU.

all modern ui apps have to adhere to these standards,so it doesn't matter if you don't care about battery life, the apps are built that way.

Just curious,what it is you want to do in the background in modern apps?

[migo]

Listen to music, obviously. Some of the internet radio apps look interesting, but they're useless if I have to be in the interface for them the whole time that I'm listening.

And it definitely is the fault of the OS, if it doesn't have a toggle. RIM did it properly with PlayBook OS, and Windows 7 and earlier have always let you just run music while minimised. It's a pretty common usage scenario. If it's an issue of using APIs properly, they should make sure that every music app in the store can run in the background, and regardless, they should have put a toggle in as well.

[rfirth]

Listen to music, obviously. Some of the internet radio apps look interesting, but they're useless if I have to be in the interface for them the whole time that I'm listening.

Well, try them out. They should work in the background. It sounds like you found one that was written incorrectly and doesn't. Try the default music app... it gives you free streaming. It's pretty awesome.

And it definitely is the fault of the OS, if it doesn't have a toggle. RIM did it properly with PlayBook OS, and Windows 7 and earlier have always let you just run music while minimised. It's a pretty common usage scenario. If it's an issue of using APIs properly, they should make sure that every music app in the store can run in the background, and regardless, they should have put a toggle in as well.

Microsoft isn't going to do an exhaustive test of the app. It's up to the developer to do and to fix. Complain to them and/or write a review for that app that mentions the shortcoming. It's absolutely not a fault of the OS.

No, no toggle. That breeds laziness (developer laziness). It masks the symptoms instead of treating the disease. It should just be written properly. Yes, it's a matter of using APIs appropriately.

[Dashel]

They definitely need to make some tweaks in this area. Its particularly frustrating on my Surface that we simply can't trust it to manage resources effecietly yet (or worse, leaves it up to the app).

If MS doesn't get that, it has little chance in the appliancesphere. Less ads, more updates.

[zhangm Supervisor]

And it definitely is the fault of the OS, if it doesn't have a toggle. RIM did it properly with PlayBook OS, and Windows 7 and earlier have always let you just run music while minimised.

Windows 8 puts processes into an idle mode to optimize resource usage. App developers are the ones responsible for making their apps tell the OS that it indeed needs to run in the background. The OS is asking your music app, "Hey, you busy?" and the app is replying, "Nope." It shouldn't, but the developer never told it not to.

[migo]

Well, try them out. They should work in the background. It sounds like you found one that was written incorrectly and doesn't. Try the default music app... it gives you free streaming. It's pretty awesome.

Not of the type I want. I see that yes, it does play music in the background, but there's no mood-based playlists or artist discovery going on.

Microsoft isn't going to do an exhaustive test of the app.

They totally should, they barely have enough apps as is. Once it gets more populated, it would make sense to just leave it up to the developers, but at the moment, it's about properly supporting the devs.

It's up to the developer to do and to fix. Complain to them and/or write a review for that app that mentions the shortcoming. It's absolutely not a fault of the OS.

Yes it is, because the OS doesn't have a toggle for apps running in the background.

No, no toggle. That breeds laziness (developer laziness). It masks the symptoms instead of treating the disease. It should just be written properly. Yes, it's a matter of using APIs appropriately.

It's not a matter of developer laziness, it's a matter of choice to use the computer how I like. That was the appeal of Windows compared to OSX, if MS keeps this up they'll be removing that advantage, and handing it to Android (and Linux maybe). And it doesn't breed dev laziness on the PlayBook, so you're wrong all around.

Microsoft is in 3rd place now. They need to stop acting like they're in first place. The only reason people are using Windows 8 in the numbers they are is because of Legacy support. They need to do more to make it appealing for people to use Metro.

[Crimson Rain]

Third party.

Fault of the app developer.

Also, Steam has issues with "background audio metro apps."

[Matthew S.]

Not of the type I want. I see that yes, it does play music in the background, but there's no mood-based playlists or artist discovery going on.

They totally should, they barely have enough apps as is. Once it gets more populated, it would make sense to just leave it up to the developers, but at the moment, it's about properly supporting the devs.

Yes it is, because the OS doesn't have a toggle for apps running in the background.

It's not a matter of developer laziness, it's a matter of choice to use the computer how I like. That was the appeal of Windows compared to OSX, if MS keeps this up they'll be removing that advantage, and handing it to Android (and Linux maybe). And it doesn't breed dev laziness on the PlayBook, so you're wrong all around.

Thats like me saying I'll develop a chat app and it's up to the users to create the network connection (in code!). It's not Microsofts responsibility while I agree for these type of media apps there should be some check that they are indeed background-able it's still up to the developer to KNOW THE API and fix their ****.

[Dashel]

Without stronger app approval standards, this problem will only get worse. You can blame the devs all you want but as said, MS is a distant 3rd and can't afford the freedom they allowed desktop developers in this new market space. If they don't tighten up their approvals like Apple did, all this will be for naught.

The handling of 'suspending' apps that aren't in view is tragically stupid on powerful PCs and yet doesn't work well on low power devices either. Congrats MS, you've annoyed both camps.

[Dashel]

Another log for the fire, even MS's own Store app doesn't correctly update in the background (Nor the Nook app). I think we can all agree MS's packaged apps aren't very good, so if they can't use their API cleanly, how exactly do you expect 3rd party to magically implement it consistantly?

[zhangm Supervisor]

The handling of 'suspending' apps that aren't in view is tragically stupid on powerful PCs and yet doesn't work well on low power devices either. Congrats MS, you've annoyed both camps.

Per-app design - an app can request to run in the background, like the Microsoft Music app, if the dev implements that option.

Without stronger app approval standards, this problem will only get worse.

Correct, the store is full of ****.

[vcfan]

Another log for the fire, even MS's own Store app doesn't correctly update in the background (Nor the Nook app). I think we can all agree MS's packaged apps aren't very good, so if they can't use their API cleanly, how exactly do you expect 3rd party to magically implement it consistantly?

many apps implement these properly,so its a developer problem. case closed.

[Nothing Here]

iHeart music app runs in the background. I use it all the time with no issues.

[cluberti]

Indeed - unfortunately, app development is something almost anyone can do. Developing a GOOD application that works properly and doesn't behave poorly is not, which is why most software "stores", whether they be virtual or ones in the physical world selling you packaged boxes and discs, are full of junk with a few gems thrown in. And not always by the party that wrote the platform the app runs on, either - I've seen more than a few "1st party" turd apps in my day, so no, that's not uncommon either.

[KevinN206]

I find it hilarious that people are complaining problems on THIRD-PARTY software who aren't implementing the features that Microsoft exposes via public APIs.

Microsoft has a set of API for running background tasks and audio for Metro apps. It's up to the developer to implement the appropriate background tasks for their specific application. It should NOT be mandatory because Microsoft should NOT be able to choose how the developer wants to implement his/her software. Microsoft provided the necessary API and samples for developer to implement. It's the developer's fault for not implementing background audio if the app has audio ability. What if the developer DOES NOT want audio in the background?

Suppose that you make background audio to be mandatory then how do you propose developer deal with games? Do you want audio from game in the background continuing to play? So now you have to make an exception. Or better yet, let the developer decide what is and what is not appropriate for his/her apps.

Reading: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=27411

[Brandon Live Veteran]

Another log for the fire, even MS's own Store app doesn't correctly update in the background (Nor the Nook app). I think we can all agree MS's packaged apps aren't very good, so if they can't use their API cleanly, how exactly do you expect 3rd party to magically implement it consistantly?

Huh? What are you expecting it to do that it doesn't?

[Joshie]

This is a case of a poorly developed third party app and a user who seems completely unwilling to lay even a fraction of a percentage of the blame at the developer's feet.

OP has already decided this is Microsoft's fault and Microsoft's responsibility. The developer himself could say "Dude, it's my fault, not Microsoft's", and this guy would probably still ignore him.

[cluberti]

Full disclosure, I am a Microsoft employee, and I also work in the field in a support role, but this post is of course me, and not "Microsoft".

With the necessities out of the way, I find it's pretty typical that if a developer blames Microsoft for an issue, the customer comes to us and tells us it's our fault because the app vendor said so. However, if I want to resolve the issue and the blame is really at the 3rd party's end, I need to prove it isn't a Microsoft fault, and sometimes, I even need to figure out where the 3rd party has gone wrong if possible - I can't just say the same thing in reverse and get anyone to believe me, even if I'm right. You get used to the double standard.