7 ms·

I'm not really sure if they are hurting themselves.

tumult 16y ago
The elves will leave Middle Earth, and they will truly be left with nothing but fart apps. They need to fix this clause, fast.
- axod 16y ago
  Definitely. After all, other closed restrictive platforms such as games consoles only contain rubbish. For every clojure zealot, there are probably 10 objective-c developers who will be happy with less competition.
  - tumult 16y ago
    This is a mistaken claim. Naughty Dog, for example, uses a precompilation phase in their games involving Lisp that builds into machine and graphics code. Most games, too, have a dynamic runtime in the form of a customized scripting engine in their game, tailored to the needs of their game. Sometimes this is done with a pre-existing language like Lua, sometimes it's built from scratch, like UnrealScript (Unreal1 - 3 engines). All of these are now banned.
    - smallblacksun 16y ago
      Interpreters that run on the iphone have always been banned.
      - tumult 16y ago
        Before, it was just interpreters that could load in external code, i.e. user input or the internet. Now, they are all banned.
- khelloworld 16y ago
  As much as I'd like to agree with you, that is simply not going to happen. Do you seriously think companies/developers like EA, Cultured Code, Omni Group etc are going to leave the app store just because apps written in Scheme or Actionscript or .Net are not welcome on the app store? Again, as much as I'd like to agree with you, none of the prominent app developers are going to be leaving anytime soon. And, as for people who make Farting apps, they probably wont care anyways because use Objective-C or Actionscript, the apps are rather simple anyways. The efficiency of writing code probably wont matter to them.
  - daeken 16y ago
    EA's games are in violation of this rule, due to using Lua. Think again.
    - axod 16y ago
      Then either EA will rewrite it, or they'll pay Apple a shedload of money to forget about it. They certainly won't start whining about it.
      - tumult 16y ago
        No, Apply will just selectively turn a blind eye when it's convenient for them, and arbitrarily apply the restriction in other cases. Evil.
        sunchild 16y ago
        That's called exercising discretion. It happens under the real laws too. I don't think you know what "evil" means.
        tumult 16y ago
        You are wrong, selective enforcement is evil.
zephyrfalcon 16y ago
Not in the short run. There is obviously no shortage of developers (who are willing the use the mandated languages) or apps. But I do think they may regret this eventually. By excluding languages like Scheme, and many others, they are excluding developers who prefer these languages. One could argue that these developers are among the smarter and more creative ones. So, when competitors get their act together, and come out with a similar device that doesn't suck, and an app store alternative that does not have these restrictions, then this is where such developers will go. Essentially, they're providing the competition with a sizable pool of (often disgruntled) developers. There is no real competition right now, but they're making it more likely that there will be, in a year or two. Anyway, just my $0.99... :-)

The elves will leave Middle Earth, and they will truly be left with nothing but fart apps. They need to fix this clause, fast.

axod 16y ago
Definitely. After all, other closed restrictive platforms such as games consoles only contain rubbish. For every clojure zealot, there are probably 10 objective-c developers who will be happy with less competition.
- tumult 16y ago
  This is a mistaken claim. Naughty Dog, for example, uses a precompilation phase in their games involving Lisp that builds into machine and graphics code. Most games, too, have a dynamic runtime in the form of a customized scripting engine in their game, tailored to the needs of their game. Sometimes this is done with a pre-existing language like Lua, sometimes it's built from scratch, like UnrealScript (Unreal1 - 3 engines). All of these are now banned.
  - smallblacksun 16y ago
    Interpreters that run on the iphone have always been banned.
    - tumult 16y ago
      Before, it was just interpreters that could load in external code, i.e. user input or the internet. Now, they are all banned.
khelloworld 16y ago
As much as I'd like to agree with you, that is simply not going to happen. Do you seriously think companies/developers like EA, Cultured Code, Omni Group etc are going to leave the app store just because apps written in Scheme or Actionscript or .Net are not welcome on the app store? Again, as much as I'd like to agree with you, none of the prominent app developers are going to be leaving anytime soon. And, as for people who make Farting apps, they probably wont care anyways because use Objective-C or Actionscript, the apps are rather simple anyways. The efficiency of writing code probably wont matter to them.
- daeken 16y ago
  EA's games are in violation of this rule, due to using Lua. Think again.
  - axod 16y ago
    Then either EA will rewrite it, or they'll pay Apple a shedload of money to forget about it. They certainly won't start whining about it.
    - tumult 16y ago
      No, Apply will just selectively turn a blind eye when it's convenient for them, and arbitrarily apply the restriction in other cases. Evil.
      - sunchild 16y ago
        That's called exercising discretion. It happens under the real laws too. I don't think you know what "evil" means.
        tumult 16y ago
        You are wrong, selective enforcement is evil.

zephyrfalcon 16y ago

Not in the short run. There is obviously no shortage of developers (who are willing the use the mandated languages) or apps. But I do think they may regret this eventually. By excluding languages like Scheme, and many others, they are excluding developers who prefer these languages. One could argue that these developers are among the smarter and more creative ones. So, when competitors get their act together, and come out with a similar device that doesn't suck, and an app store alternative that does not have these restrictions, then this is where such developers will go. Essentially, they're providing the competition with a sizable pool of (often disgruntled) developers. There is no real competition right now, but they're making it more likely that there will be, in a year or two. Anyway, just my $0.99... :-)