This is a non-story. How could this developer have not known that Apple's app store agreement forbids emulators, interpreters, and so forth?
I mean, not only is it there in plain letters, but that particular clause was all over the interwebz! The fault here lies solely on the developer for spending all that time and money on development without reading the contract.
Or maybe I should say "praise". This is most likely a PR stunt to increase awareness of his product so he can then go sell it to jailbreakers (who are probably more likely to use, enjoy, and be able to understand it anyway).
The comments below the article seem to explain why he thought it would be possible to submit the emulator and have it approved. The SEGA games in the app store contain emulators, and it looks as though there are more apps that do the same.
Inconsistency on Apple's part (haven't seen that before).
Maybe there is a difference between containing an emulator and emulating stuff you download from the internet. I don't know the SEGA stuff, but I suppose they just use an emulator internally.
Perhaps with some repackaging that C64 emulator could have made it into the App store, too: just claim it is an app that can run a lot of C64 games (that would have to be bundled with the app). Remove the part where it can run games downloaded from the internet.
Yes. In fact, there's a whole section in the developer agreement (section 3.3.2) that explicitly forbids using (non-built-in) interpreters on downloaded files. This might be a nice app, and maybe the guy thought he could roll the dice and sneak it past, but this is the rare open and closed case of Apple doing exactly what they said they were going to do.
According to Manomio's CEO, Apple had seemed excited about the app. That's hardly a guarantee that the app would be approved, but it seems rather ridiculous to express excitement about an app, only to reject it after Manomio had invested significant amounts of time and money into the project and had completed it.
I think some people (including the app reviewer possibly) are not understanding the SDK terms correctly.
"3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-in interpreter(s)."
The key phrase here is "other executable code"- i.e., code that isn't already in the application bundle. There's nothing wrong with running an emulator or interpreter. You just can't have it dynamically download new games or apps that weren't already bundled. It's understandable why Apple would have this restriction, or else there would be a lot of people trying to build their own app store within an app.
If the C64 app didn't allow new games to be d/l'ed then there's no reason for the rejection. Perhaps it wasn't clear to the reviewer (it certainly isn't to me, after reading that article) whether it allowed new games to be loaded or not.
There's no way that it could have been unclear to the reviewer - if the app includes download functionality, then it would be in the build that the reviewer saw and rejected.
Actually, there is a bit of a story here around how to get emulator/software packages bundled and placed on the Apple store. The interesting paragraph for me was:
"Lyscarz pointed out to us that there are a number of apps in the App Store that do exactly the same thing from CHIP-8 emulators, programmable calculators and, of course, Frotz, a Z-machine interpreter. In fact, Sega's Golden Axe and Sonic iPhone games are nothing more than emulators packaged with the original game ROMs."
With a bit of work, I suspect that the C64 Games can be repackaged in such a way that they are no longer considered "emulators."
Why do people keep developing for the iPhone? What's the point in wasting a year of hard work on an application that will just get rejected out of hand?
This is stupid. This is beyond stupid. Apple is going out of their way to alienate developers and they keep going right back to the platform like the stupid sheep they are.
I think source of this problem (Apple abusing developers) lies in Steve Jobs's personality. Many a time, the company develops a culture based on its leader (or founder, etc.) In this Steve Jobs's personality seems to have a influenced the Apple culture heavily. If any of you remember, Jobs is not one of the nicest guys is the world. He is well-known for his arrogance, anger, and lack of respect for his coworkers and fellow human beings. We're talkign about a guy who even refused to pay the child support fees for his own child and a father of a bastard. Jobs also has an intolerance for anything non-american (or non-western) which is probably why he charges upto 6 times the price for the iPhone in India (a good thing; loosers in India who buy it deserve to get their money stolen by sucha crppy product). In any case, Steve Jobs is famous for his incredible anger, he has been known to hit people, throw them on the wall and other stuff (before he deservedly got fired in 1984 for his incredibly unethical behabior.) He is in essence a control freak. This control freak in him, is why the App Store also acts like sucha control freak, destroying months of effort develpoers put in with a simple rejection letter. Hopefully once the nutcase Steve Jobs dies from whatever disease that has been holding him from work, some sense might get into Apple. As personal advice, I suggest every abstain from touching, thinking or using any Apple product until Apple steps ups its ethical standards, removes all these DRM-like/based restrictions from their products and ofcourse, start showing some repsect for developers.
Manomio then contacted Apple Europe in the UK and detailed what they were planning to accomplish and according to Manomio's CEO Brian Lyscarz, "Apple seemed really excited" and so he felt safe that they would sanction the final app. With that assurance in hand, Manomio proceeded to secure the necessary licensing from individual publishers and finalize work on this major project.
This was an incredibly stupid move on the developer's part. They "contacted Apple Europe" who "seemed excited" and they considered that an assurance worth spending money on developing the software and purchasing licenses? It almost sounds like they emailed someone they know at Apple about what they were planning on doing, who responded "Nice...sounds cool." It sure doesn't sound like due diligence or the kind of thing you'd do before spending tons of time and money on an app you may not be able to sell. An expensive mistake, but I don't feel bad for them.
Is it even possible to get such an assurance from Apple? If they do approve apps which violate your plain reading of the ToS, and reject apps which don't even seem to, what can you do besides roll the dice or stay out of the market entirely?
1. Build apps that adhere to the TOS (they didn't)
2. Break the standard TOS, but get written assurances from Apple in advance (they didn't)
3. Avoid the market (they didn't)
4. Take the big risk and hope things work out OK. (they did)
Obviously, #4 is a valid option...I just think it's a stupid one for a small company that can't afford to blow a year on something like this, but maybe they can. Regardless, how can you feel sorry for them?
Also, it may seem that Apple approved apps which violate the TOS, but does this developer know that those other app developers didn't arrange this in advance with Apple? I have a hard time believing that a company like Sega would risk so much time and money developing apps without first talking to Apple and getting some clear assurance that they'd be allowed to sell it when they were done. Why couldn't this company have done the same?
Apple is being quite consistent in rejecting this - that isn't a story.
The only story here is yet another reason to dislike this policy of Apple's. Because of this policy, something exciting is not available for the iPhone.
* the policy of the appstore obviously sucks for both developers and end-users
* developers miscalculate the risk that their application will be rejected and therefore engage mindlessly into the implementation phase
There is not much to do about the first (except of course give Apple the bad PR it deserves by e.g. posting this stuff to HN). But developers can/should calculate their profit expectations more thoroughly.
I mean, not only is it there in plain letters, but that particular clause was all over the interwebz! The fault here lies solely on the developer for spending all that time and money on development without reading the contract.
Or maybe I should say "praise". This is most likely a PR stunt to increase awareness of his product so he can then go sell it to jailbreakers (who are probably more likely to use, enjoy, and be able to understand it anyway).