Yes, Dianne, they are using Advanced Task Killers, and I fully share your sentiment for those apps -- it makes our app look evil, even when it's trying to behave very well :)
In the spirit of the Thanksgiving season, I'd like to be thankful for having users and Android being successful enough for them to care :) Do you think System.exit() is a really bad option in this case? Or should we find some different approach to solve this ecosystem problem? It sucks to see comments like "Works pretty well but since last update it keeps self-starting..." -- and then to find out exactly that they are using the Advanced Task Killer, etc. Also in the spirit of the season, thank you very much Dianne for putting up with so many of our questions -- you're doing something really invaluable for the developer community! Artem On Nov 25, 6:36 pm, Dianne Hackborn <hack...@android.com> wrote: > They are probably looking at one of those $&%^#!! task killer apps, and not > understanding that just because a process exists does not mean it matters or > anything. Unless you are actually starting a service and not stopping it, > all they are seeing is that sometime during boot the system needed to launch > your app, and it hasn't needed to kill its process yet because it has enough > memory for everything else that currently needs to run. Which is generally > a GOOD thing. > > I hate these task killers. I hate hate hate them. And I hate all the > misinformation that the people using them spread all over the place. > > Sorry maybe it is time to take a break for Thanksgiving. :) > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:11 PM, Artem - WorkSmart Labs > <p.ar...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > Our app needs to do a tiny amount of work at boot-up to reschedule > > some reminders for the user. So we made a BroadcastReceiver for the > > boot event and declared it in our manifest. Everything works well, > > except many users have a habit of checking what's running right after > > starting the phone, and they complain about our application running in > > the background "all the time". I completely understand the Android > > policy of not discarding the applications until the memory is needed, > > but in a case like this, when no user interaction is involved and > > there is no reason to believe that the user will start our app soon, > > is there any way to cause our process to exit instantly right after > > completing the execution of the receiver? I am looking for something > > like Process.destroy(), or some equivalent. > > > I believe "empty" processes should be the first ones to get cleaned > > up, so if we can just give Android a small nudge, it should clean our > > application right up. > > > Any ideas? > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "Android Developers" group. > > To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<android-developers%2Bunsubs > > cr...@googlegroups.com> > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en > > -- > Dianne Hackborn > Android framework engineer > hack...@android.com > > Note: please don't send private questions to me, as I don't have time to > provide private support, and so won't reply to such e-mails. All such > questions should be posted on public forums, where I and others can see and > answer them. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en
