5 ms·
> > these devices are a lot different: they're running on battery, sometimes on WiFi > but often on expensive (both in money and battery) 2G or 3G data n
by bosky101 13y ago
>
> these devices are a lot different: they're running on battery, sometimes on WiFi
> but often on expensive (both in money and battery) 2G or 3G data networks,
> and essentially "off" most of the time.
> On iOS devices, applications are killed and evicted from memory when they attempt
> to do too much background processing or use too much memory.
> On Windows RT and Windows 8 Modern applications, when the application is not in
> the foreground we only get a few seconds of CPU execution time every 15 minutes
> and again, strict memory limitations if we want to stay loaded.
> And when the Skype application is unloaded, it can no longer receive incoming
> calls or IMs, rendering it a lot less useful.
>
This is pretty much why/how all IM clients for iphone/ipad/android work as well.
( i work on verbs.im, we're a team of 4 now, here's a link to our privacy policy http://includetech.co/privacy/verbs http://includetech.co/privacy/verbs)
The server becomes a proxy for your account, and being able to send push notifications.
Your apps become thinner clients needing lesser battery, bandwidth.
Infact we've got a step further, and replaced XMPP/HTTP with MQTT to save even more battery.
( here's a nice article profiling power consumption of MQTT vs HTTP here across wifi/3g: http://stephendnicholas.com/archives/1217 http://stephendnicholas.com/archives/1217 )
That being said, the recent iOS 7 have introduced API's for longer running background apps
~B
- Torgo 13y agoI don't know why this necessitates the removal of supernodes though, because it has always been the case that desktop clients could disable supernode functionality with a checkbox option. Why would it ever be enabled (or even an option) on a mobile client? Or is the issue simply that the majority of clients have become non-supernode-capable and it became an issue? I wish he would have went into more detail on this because at first glance the explanation is not sufficient to justify the change.
- wmf 13y agoKaufman's point is that phones don't even have enough resources to be a normal Skype peer, let alone a supernode. Thus work had to be shifted from peers to servers. I guess they could have shifted all that work to supernodes, but it was probably simpler to just put that functionality in reliable MS data centers. Also, I don't know that it's safe to send iOS/Android push messages from random PCs.