For me, as a power user, "quit" means "stop doing anything!!", for an IM app, it means: stop showing me as available, stop using my yahoo login because I want this other program to use it! Just stop everything! Don't assume "oh you just want to be offline!", NO! I want to stop you in your tracks and prevent you from doing anything what-so-ever.
I quit an application when I feel it's not doing what I want. I quit an application when I feel the application is being presumptuous and making false assumptions about what I want to do.
I hardly ever quit an application because I need the memory .. it's not about process/memory management. I often close application to reduce clutter on my desktop, and clutter can be reduced without actually quitting applications, so they have a point there, but I'd still hate it if applications assume that I don't really want to quit.
It really annoys me that closing Banshee doesn't stop it from playing music.
It's about setting rules and drawing lines; it's about having control over one's out computer.
I quit a movie/music player to stop from emitting sounds. No, the sound menu is not enough replacement. It might be a good alternative, but not good enough to warrant "never quitting the media application".
I open a browser in private mode then quit it, because .. well it's private mode; if you can't quit it it kinda defeats the point.
I quit a download application (e.g. a torrent client) to stop it from downloading/uploading (to free up bandwidth).
You could try to rethink every use case, and you can provide other ways to achieve the same goals. But, in the end, this is not a good reason to make applications non-quit-able.
I quit an application when I feel it's not doing what I want. I quit an application when I feel the application is being presumptuous and making false assumptions about what I want to do.
I hardly ever quit an application because I need the memory .. it's not about process/memory management. I often close application to reduce clutter on my desktop, and clutter can be reduced without actually quitting applications, so they have a point there, but I'd still hate it if applications assume that I don't really want to quit.
It really annoys me that closing Banshee doesn't stop it from playing music.
It's about setting rules and drawing lines; it's about having control over one's out computer.
I quit a movie/music player to stop from emitting sounds. No, the sound menu is not enough replacement. It might be a good alternative, but not good enough to warrant "never quitting the media application".
I open a browser in private mode then quit it, because .. well it's private mode; if you can't quit it it kinda defeats the point.
I quit a download application (e.g. a torrent client) to stop it from downloading/uploading (to free up bandwidth).
You could try to rethink every use case, and you can provide other ways to achieve the same goals. But, in the end, this is not a good reason to make applications non-quit-able.