Apple Eases Restrictions On iPhone Developers 195
WrongSizeGlass writes "MacRumors has a story on a report by Apple Outsider's Matt Drance that Apple is easing their restrictions on interpreted code used in iPhone development, a change which allows game developers in particular to continue to use interpreted languages such as Lua in their App Store applications. The change comes alongside Apple's further modifications of its iOS developer terms that again allow for limited analytics data collection to aid advertisers and developers, but appear to shut out non-independent companies such as Google's AdMob from receiving the data. It's not enough of an 'about face' to let Adobe or Google back in the picture but they've backpedaled enough to let the little guys squeeze through."
parsers and RPN (Score:2, Interesting)
It's just hit me: The prohibition on interpreted code taken literally might prevent someone making a graphing calculator app and implementing the graphing functionality by translating the equation into RPN code for a very simple stack-based virtual machine, and then interpreting that for each point. I assume that's the standard way to implement graphing, since it's a waste of CPU time to parse infix notation for every point (when I wrote a graphing calculator app for the Z80-based Sharp Wizard 7xx, that's what I did). It might also prohibit someone from implementing a Boolean text search by parsing the search expression into RPN code (that's how I implemented the Boolean search in Bible+ for PalmOS).
Now, it's true that they allow the use of interpreted code with Apple's written permission, but only "for providing minor features or functionality". In the case of a graphing calculator app, the interpreted code is used to implement the primary functionality. And in the case of a Boolean text search, depending on the app, that might well be a major feature.
Maybe this doesn't count as really interpreted code because one doesn't have Turing completeness in the interpreter--it's too simple. But with finite memory, one never really has Turing completeness. And anyway, if Turing completeness is the defining feature of an interpreter, then one could get around the restriction by setting a big arbitrary limit on the number of times a conditional can be interpreted (maybe, 2^100).
Re:big nothing (Score:4, Interesting)
Those are the top three reasons because few people even bother writing the interesting apps anymore; just to name a few that ought to be there:
- Bluetooth DUN
- USB 3G modem driver
- custom touch keyboards
- non-Apple music and video stores
- in-device software development
- WiFi music sync
- on-device file management
- full synchronization and backup with box.net
Re:Today they allow it, tomorrow it will be forbid (Score:5, Interesting)
Ah, yes, the padded numbers from the 2 for 1 Verizon promotion, and the slump in numbers because the iPhone 4 release is very soon...
Numbers for 1 quarter don't tell the whole picture, although I am glad Android is doing well - competition is good for all.
This has come up in discussion before - 95% of the apps submitted to the store get approved, and any company that is serious about making a living from mobile development is *crazy* to ignore a 100 million user base just because they think it might possibly cost them a little bit extra in development. If your company cannot afford to "take the risk" (ie, developing an iPhone app that is rejected would cause the company to fold) then it has bigger issues than a potentially "inconsistent" company.
"Wasting their time" developing for an app that (for conservative estimates, ignoring older phones), is available to 50 million customers... right.
If you are serious about development in the mobile market you are crazy to ignore the iPhone - the user base is enormous, the app store is centralised and it continues to grow.
It would be the equivalent of being a scissors manufacturer, or a can opener maker and not making a left handed version for the cost of development. Even if the left handed population is small, relative to the whole (10% approx), it is still a market that is worth developing for. The iPhone is a significantly larger portion of the smartphone market than 10%. Ignoring it because you are worried about a serious minority of app rejections is just not good business sense.
By all means, develop for Android (especially with the rise in handsets and users - it's a clear emerging market), but any sensible business will also be "risking" iPhone development.
Re:iOS Development (Score:5, Interesting)
Just the existence of Stash on the App Store - basically an app for porn, though it doesn't provide the explicit content - is evidence that Apple isn't nearly as draconian and capricious as many in this thread are portraying them to be.
Given that we've seen a bunch of cases where an application was approved for N major releases, and then blocked in (N+1)th, over the feature that has been present in it from the start, I dare say that this doesn't prove anything.
Now, if you want to have some proof - write an anonymous hysterical complaint about your own app ("porn! think of the children!" etc) to Apple, and see if they tell you to GTFO, or re-review and pull the app down. If you're that trusting of Apple, I dare you to do this, and post the result of this little experiment on Slashdot.
Re:big nothing (Score:1, Interesting)
umm,, i forgot my login but what does android have anything to do with talk about one app store? it doesn't. i have an HTC Evo from Sprint and frankly i have been downloading like crazy and i have not found any app that crashes yet.. and apple doesnt want more than one app store because they want conformity. they want to be able to say 'NO POKEMON APPLICATIONS' and have every single one of their devices be affected immediatly and BAM every single end user with a pokemon app suddenly loses that app. they can gussy it up all they want about 'crashing' and stuff like that but the main thing is they want comformity, and they want to be able to affect everyone all at once. and with one app store they can do just that. they can decide that certain apps arent on any of their devices. and certain enterprising people took notice to that and decided that they would 'hack' into the iPhone and make their own app store. this is what we now know is jailbreaking. and now what this is is called a rant.... i dont know where im going with this but Apple is to the U.S.S.R. and Communism as Android is to the United States of America and Democracy and Republics