4 ms·

I don't know. Termius doesn't do that does it? (Background App Refresh I mean) The workaround Termius apparently uses is absurd (and rather amusing): it adds l

by ecjhdnc2025 2y ago

I don't know. Termius doesn't do that does it? (Background App Refresh I mean) The workaround Termius apparently uses is absurd (and rather amusing): it adds location tracking it doesn't really need. Because apps that have location tracking enabled don't lose their connections: https://support.termius.com/hc/en-us/articles/900006226306-I-can-t-use-the-iOS-app-in-the-background https://support.termius.com/hc/en-us/articles/900006226306-I... This is a clever solution but it does have a Kafkaesque quality.

kalleboo 2y ago
The "location tracking" thing is so absurd. Apps use the location tracking permission to stay active in the background. App Review says "why do you have this permission? you need to actually have a user-facing feature that justifies tracking the location to get it" so apps just add a pointless "my location history" feature that is not actually needed just to make App Review happy. At that point, just allow background refresh! Everyone is just working around the rule anyway, why does it even exist? The App Store is so dysfunctional.
- threeseed 2y ago
  > Everyone is just working around the rule anyway, why does it even exist Because most developers are not working around the rule. And if you allowed every app to permanently background you would compromise the iPad experience.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 2y ago
    Is macbook experience compromised? They are essentially the same hardware now, and I didn't notice any issues with 'macbook experience'.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - neilalexander 2y ago
    Apple have full control over process scheduling so there is absolutely no reason that it should compromise the experience at all. They could notify the app it's about to go into the background so that resource-intensive tasks can be paused, then severely limit CPU shares to preserve battery life and then notify it again when it's about to hit the foreground. That would be enough just to keep application state in memory or socket connections alive.
- ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
  Right -- that's what I meant by Kafakesque. Though it's a bit more Brazil than Kafka, I realised after I made a cup of tea.

kalleboo 2y ago

The "location tracking" thing is so absurd. Apps use the location tracking permission to stay active in the background. App Review says "why do you have this permission? you need to actually have a user-facing feature that justifies tracking the location to get it" so apps just add a pointless "my location history" feature that is not actually needed just to make App Review happy. At that point, just allow background refresh! Everyone is just working around the rule anyway, why does it even exist? The App Store is so dysfunctional.

threeseed 2y ago
> Everyone is just working around the rule anyway, why does it even exist Because most developers are not working around the rule. And if you allowed every app to permanently background you would compromise the iPad experience.
- Andrew_nenakhov 2y ago
  Is macbook experience compromised? They are essentially the same hardware now, and I didn't notice any issues with 'macbook experience'.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- neilalexander 2y ago
  Apple have full control over process scheduling so there is absolutely no reason that it should compromise the experience at all. They could notify the app it's about to go into the background so that resource-intensive tasks can be paused, then severely limit CPU shares to preserve battery life and then notify it again when it's about to hit the foreground. That would be enough just to keep application state in memory or socket connections alive.
ecjhdnc2025 2y ago
Right -- that's what I meant by Kafakesque. Though it's a bit more Brazil than Kafka, I realised after I made a cup of tea.