digitalmars.D - Re: Poll: how long have you been into D
- "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> Jul 07 2013
On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 02:38:15AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:On Sat, 6 Jul 2013 14:08:20 -0700 "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:I resisted "upgrading" to a "smart"phone for many years (people used to laugh at me for carrying around such a prehistoric antique -- to a point I took pride in showing it off to the kids), until the battery life started to wear out and require charging once a day. Finally I succumbed to my phone company who kept bugging me about upgrading (and of course, I chose an Android instead of an iPhone). Well, it's nice to upgrade, I suppose, but I found that I *still* have to recharge once a day 'cos of the battery drain from all those advanced "features" that were never there in the old phone. Sigh...
Yea. I don't accept that "smartphones" are really phones. They're PDA's with telephony tacked on.
Ah, what's in a name? If they want to call PDA's with telephony "smartphones" then so be it. I wouldn't sweat it with names that are arbitrary anyways.Not saying that's necessarily a bad way to go - it's fine if PDA is your primary use-case. But if you're mainly interested in a phone it's not only complete overkill, but also the wrong set of design compromises.
I guess the whole point was to have PDA functionality that included telephony so that you didn't have to carry two devices around? Mind you, having two devices isn't always a bad thing... try looking up something buried deep in the device while talking on the phone, for example. A royal pain when it's the same device!They do, like you say, soak up ridiculous amounts of battery power too. Especially Androids.
Really? I didn't find my Android significantly worse in battery usage than my old iPod (and that was an *iPod*, not an iPhone). Or maybe both are equally bad. :-PMaybe it's all the VM/dynamic shit. I did generally get a couple days out of the iPhone (as long as I didn't play Rage), instead of the "just *barely* one day" I got with the Nexus S (even with the cellular stuff disabled). That may not sound too bad to some people, but with the phones, the near-daily recharging got to feel like an enormous ball-and-chain (not to mention *trying* to turn off the damn sound globally every night so the stupid things wouldn't wake me up for notifications and other shit that I don't care about when I'm sleeping). I already have enough shit to do every time I go to bed and wake up, I don't need that added to my daily overhead.
Yeah ever since my wife got an iPhone, our attempts to fall asleep have been constantly interrupted by annoying dings and zings every so often from stray emails, notifications, people sending text messages in the middle of the night for no good reason, etc.. We try to make the best of it, though. I set my morning alarm to a rooster call, and she set hers to dogs barking. A hilarious way to wake up. :-P [...]At least Android actually has a task manager that lets you kill off misbehaving apps and things that shouldn't be running that are taking up 50MB of RAM for no good reason. On my old iPod, I'd have to hard-reset every few days 'cos some misbehaving app would soak up 100% RAM and 100% CPU and the thing would brick.
Yea, that's one of the zillions of things that bug me about iOS/Android: There's no equivalents to the taskbar or "close program" buttons. Sure, they both have something that pretends to be like a taskbar, but on Android it tosses in "recently used" stuff with no indication which ones are actually running.
Just long-click the 'task manager' icon to the front screen and you can fire it up to kill off stray apps whenever you want. :-PAnd on iOS - well, it *might* be working like a taskbar, but honestly I never could really tell what the hell its semantics were. I was always just *guessing* that it was the list of running programs...which made me wonder why it would (apparently?) keep freaking *everything* I was done using running in the background (at least, as far as I could tell).
Yeah I could never figure out what was running in the background on my old iPod. And couldn't find a way to manage background tasks either. It would just run slower and slower until a crawl, and then finally just freeze and fail to respond to anything (or run at 1 screen update every 5 minutes -- completely unusable). Then it's time for the two-finger salute -- power + home for 10 seconds to hard-reboot the contraption. After I got all the data and apps I needed on my Android, I retired the iPod and haven't turned back since.They're too damn opaque. At least Android actually has a decent task manager. It's just too bad you have to dig so far to get to it, which prevents it from being a real taskbar substitute.
You *could* just move it to your front screen, y'know! ;-) That's what the home button's for. Two clicks to kill off a misbehaving app (of which there are too many, sad to say -- browsers being one of the frequent offenders).*And* I can actually write my own apps for Android without needing to buy a Mac just to install the dev tools.
Amen to that. BTW, if you don't mind using a proprietary toolkit (Marmalade: <http://madewithmarmalade.com>), you *can* develop iOS stuff without ever having to touch a Mac. But to put it on your actual device you still have to pay Apple's Developer iRansom (well, or better yet just jailbreak the stupid thing instead).
If I had to, I'd jailbreak it. Seriously, the iPod became significantly easier to use after I jailbroke it -- I could actually copy files over SSH, for crying out loud! None of that "install iTunes first, use our poor reinvention of a filesystem interface just to transfer files, wait 15 minutes for the sync just to transfer a 50KB file" nonsense. I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the concept of running a full-fledged OS (which is actually a Unix core IIRC) only to artificially cripple its functionality so that you can only use the contemporary equivalent of a 2400-baud dumb terminal interface on it.Last I heard you do still have to use a Mac to submit to the App Store, and again, you have to use that one particular proprietary toolkit (which also means no D), but at least it's *possible* to make iOS stuff without putting up with OSX.
Good luck having D apps accepted by the App Store. I'm betting on D making it on Android first. If we get off our lazy bums and actually make D work on Android before the ship passes, that is. [...] On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 12:34:52PM +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:Am 07.07.2013 09:49, schrieb Russel Winder:On Sun, 2013-07-07 at 09:38 +0200, Kagamin wrote: […]I heard, wifi consumes the lion share of battery charge, try to disable it.
WiFi can be a big battery drain, but so is the screen, and (perhaps most importantly) the mobile aerial. The second of these is perhaps obvious, the first and third depend on distance to the receiver since the output signal of the phone is variable, the mobile signal much more than the WiFi. If a phone is continually searching for a mobile base station battery power will plummet.
Hmmm. It seems that I've just acquired a new appreciation for airplane mode(!).I used to work for a certain Finnish mobile company. There is no if. The mobiles need to continuously talk with their cells to handle antenna transitions, network notifications, sms/mms protocol handling among many many other things.
No wonder battery life seems better in airplane mode! I'll have to keep that in mind. T -- Long, long ago, the ancient Chinese invented a device that lets them see through walls. It was called the "window".
Jul 07 2013