What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
63 Comments
- JesseDillonUCF, on 06/23/2009, -7/+33You think your commodore 64 is really neato - what kinda chip you got in there, a dorrito?
- seantubridy, on 06/23/2009, -10/+28WTF, Apple?
- abid8740, on 06/23/2009, -7/+22Funny thing that this gets denied for being an emulator but the Sony's release of Sonic is actually a genesis emulator running a rom and gets approved?
http://macenstein.com/default/archives/4227
If this was Microsoft everyone would be throwing a ***** storm - constchar, on 06/23/2009, -1/+14For those digging him down; its a line from Weird Al's parody song "It's All About the Pentiums."
Look it up on YouTube or something, its a funny, though I'd expect nothing less from Weird Al. - dagamer34, on 06/23/2009, -2/+15The App Store policies clearly state, you are not allowed to let your app run custom code that doesn't exist at the time the app it released (so in other words, you can't go downloading games on your system after the fact). The real reason for this isn't to block emulators (it's a side effect), but to stop arbitrary code from running on a user's device. You don't know what kind of ***** Apple can get into if it's found that apps allow for a new level of insecurity through some obscure hack of an app (i.e. tell X app to open X file from a website and BOOM, instant jailbreak! or BOOM! All address book contacts deleted). You'd be surprised at what random code can do.
- Xanthrick, on 06/23/2009, -3/+14These developers say one thing, but have something else on their website. If their intention is to only sell add-on content through the official app store, then they are lying to their customers. If what they say is true in the interview, then they are lying to Apple:
"Play all your old favorite games, or why not - write your own?"
Straight from their website. So if that doesn't imply you can run your own games without the app-store, then I guess I need to go back to grade school. Why imply you can write your own games, if you can't run applications not approved by apple on the emulator? - inactive, on 06/23/2009, -4/+13And this is why a company controlling everything you can do on your phone/computer/donkey is bad for you.
- bloogey, on 06/23/2009, -1/+8fuel for haters who didn't RTFA
- HappyScrappy, on 06/23/2009, -1/+7Sony's release of Sonic? Sonic is from Sega.
Anyway, to your point, emulating code that ships with your app is okay. Allowing people to plug in additional code and emulating that is not allowed.
Thus the reason one of these apps is allowed and the other is not. - RedGreen1, on 06/23/2009, -2/+8RTFA, they even talked to folks at Apple early on in the process.
- dagamer34, on 06/23/2009, -2/+7You can't run code that doesn't exist when you publish code to the App Store. It's for security reasons, because the app could easily be used as a security vector to compromise the security of the phone.
And the same thing happened hacking a save file for 007: Agent Under Fire on the original Xbox. - jasmus, on 06/23/2009, -0/+5We need a "I don't digg you, but I don't bury you" button. You cant tell me what to do!
- shrudheuie, on 06/23/2009, -1/+6Cydia anyone?
- Texa, on 06/23/2009, -3/+7Not true. This app allows people to makes their own games. Sony's genesis emulator only lets you play one game: Sonic. I'm sure a version of the C64 app will be allowed, but they have to limit the games it can run.
- HappyScrappy, on 06/23/2009, -2/+6They talked to people at Apple Europe about it. They said they "were excited". Apple Europe doesn't approve apps, and being excited isn't the same as saying it'll be approved.
The person who said it to him mentioned that he would have to sell the add-ons through the store if he had add-ons. This program doesn't do that, it allows you to use binaries from anywhere.
He didn't follow the rules. Thus it isn't approved. - jasmus, on 06/23/2009, -5/+9Multitasking sucks in WinMo. It successfully slows your phone down gradually until you remember that the default behavior is to background apps when you press the "X", not close them, so you have to go and manually close them using the task manager.
SMS... so?
Video recording... now iPhone has that... so? (I still would never actually use it)
Connection sharing.... yes, iPhone was late to the game on this one, but it's there now.
Copy Paste, iPhone has that now too.
Windows mobile DOESN'T have a user interface you can use completely with your fingers.
Windows mobile DOESN'T have an app store (yet) that you can easily get apps from
Windows mobile DOESN'T have any standards for how a program looks and acts on your phone.
See, it's easy to point out meaningless crap. Give it a shot, it's fun. - scarnie, on 06/23/2009, -1/+4C64 for iPhone does not allow you to use binaries from anywhere but approved Apps from the App Store. We have never mentioned in this article or any of our literature that you can 'run your own games' As much as we would like to accommodate that scenario, we do not.
- judicar, on 06/23/2009, -5/+7They developed the app knowing full well that the iPhone SDK license clearly states that apps that run interpreted code will not be approved, so why all the righteous indignation?
- akeldama, on 06/23/2009, -0/+2Guess what? There are applications you can install to assist you in easily managing running programs. You can even change the default behavior of the 'X' to close rather than background the application. There's an app for that.
- cleverboy, on 06/23/2009, -0/+2I appreciate what Manomio has done, but their attitude sounds a bit naive regarding the idea that their "approach" was "approved" and that there are numerous examples currently in the AppStore that validates their approach.
As I understand it, Apple simply does not want someone setting up another multiple content interpreter/run-time inside its own OS (that doesn't use the interpreters built into the OS). The following concepts/approaches would likely have no problem being approved:
1. Using an emulator environment to run/interpret one of more finite packages/modules as an individual AppStore submission (examples: Sonic, Golden Axe). The submission must make it clear that it is NOT a "platform" like C64, but rather a "bundle".
2. Using an emulator environment to run/interpret one package/module as an individual submission, and allow "in-App purchases" to download additional "levels" or "content" (like photos, literature) to the bundled software/games.
3. Using an emulator environment to "simulate" an environment that executes scripted commands on a remote server. (examples: ssh).
4. Creating an application that reads in binary/text content files, and allows users to browse or "interpret" said content files interactively. Content must not be "executable code" (creating all new interfaces), like a Flash game, but rich text, graphics, or separated animation files read and "viewed" in a consistent manner (examples: Pangea VR, Sea Dragon Mobile, Classics, Bible, Stanza, etc).
5. Creating an application that reads in binary/text content files, and uses Apple's built-in software to interpret the human-readable code (Javascript, Quicktime, etc).
What Apple has said:
"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)."
You could interpret this in a lot of different ways, especially if you're motivated to misunderstand it, but if you slow it down, you can make a few important notations.
First, note the use of "other". What is "other"? It means any executable code that is not a static part of the application you're submitting. If you bundle 5 "games" as part of your application, and consider these five games PART of your application... you have no problem.
Next, the phrase "downloaded and used" is one block and has ONE meaning. It doesn't say that "No interpreted code may be used" it says "No interpreted code may be downloaded and used", meaning, "we don't want you to ADD interpreted code to the application AFTER it has been purchased". Can you utilize interpreted code already made part of the application? Sure! Plenty of examples for that.
Lastly, if Apple says "no interpreted code may be downloaded and used", then why are there examples of "interpreted code" in the AppStore able to be "downloaded and used"? As long as the "interpreter" is sufficiently primitive, it's really a non-issue as MANY things could be considered an "interpreter", at least conceptually. Once your interpreter is processing complex instructions that generate sophisticated animation, sound, and interactivity, you're going to start crossing the line.
As long as people refuse to understand this, their app will continue to be refused, no matter how much grass roots support they think they can generate. This is an issue about control and liability. Once you allow someone to build their own run-time engine, you've effectively created a whole new ecosystem inside of your device. People can concievably create programs INSIDE for that runtime that violate your guidelines, and you're caught in a catch-twenty-two in handling the problem. - KingGorilla, on 06/23/2009, -0/+2You mean leave them alone?
- heyimfromreddit, on 06/23/2009, -2/+4iPhone multitasks too. It just doesn't let 3rd party apps run in the background. There's a difference.
- GaryChalmers, on 06/23/2009, -2/+4As it is with all Apple products, you are at the complete mercy of the company. If you don't like that idea, don't buy their products.
- milkmage, on 06/23/2009, -1/+3READ THE ***** ARTICLE
How did you go about getting permission from the current owners of the C64 and what was their initial reaction? We had removed the rough edges before we went to Commodore Gaming. They were very impressed with what we had achieved and naturally excited to join the iPhone ride. In the end, they directed us to Kiloo Aps, who holds the rights to mobile versions of the C64 brand.
Creating any application is a huge investment, did you take any precautions like talking to Apple in the early stages of development? Yes, we spoke to the Sr. Partnership Manager, iPod & iPhone, Apple Europe in the UK, who concluded that we were okay with our approach and that Apple was actually interested in our concept - the ability to purchase add-on content via the App Store to extend an existing application. Apple would still receive their 30% cut and users could buy officially licensed C64 titles. 3.0 was announced some time later, and ‘In-App’ purchases revealed, essentially approving our general approach. - jugglingjon, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1we don't know the reason apple rejected the app; if they sounded receptive to it before, there's no reason not to think some version of the app will be released eventually.
- akeldama, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1The shame is that more people "don't like that idea."
- jasmus, on 06/23/2009, -2/+3Hackers. Malware writers.
- 13373h4X0r, on 06/23/2009, -2/+3As others here have pointed out, the fact that other apps use emulation software to operate isn't the important point! It's all about whether or not a app can execute code that is downloaded (or otherwise acquired) in the form of data.
Although some people think that Apple's primary concern here is that someone running emulator software might eventually get a virus this way (i.e., the person downloads a ROM for the emulator, and that ROM has a virus) -- and I don't doubt that Apple does indeed have that concern -- I think it is obvious that having emulators with a mechanism for downloading "ROMs" via web pages, etc, introduces the significant risk of totally sabotaging the whole iPhone app business model. Maybe the C64 emulator is not quite able to emulate all iPhone apps, but one can imagine someone making the argument that an Amiga or a IBM PC emulator should be allowed, and such an emulator could probably handle a lot of the iPhone apps.
Also, this is the same reason the Adobe Flash player isn't on the iPhone. A Flash player capable of displaying the millions of Flash-based games out there would utterly destroy a large segment of the paid app market. Maybe, once complex 3D apps represent more than half of the app store, Apple would feel comfortable putting Flash on the iPhone, because they'd still get app revenue from apps that could not be implemented in Flash.
-- and I think that the creator of this particular C64 emulator for the iPhone seems disingenuous, because he must be well aware of the fact th - dawa259, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2But common, how many people really are going to wright there own app? They are gona end up buying it in app threw iTunes.
- mrBitch, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2Actually, you're absolutely correct. iPhone has multitasking, just not for 3rd party apps.
Why you're getting buried for stating a fact, I'm not really sure. - Charlotte_Web, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Ok!
- Charlotte_Web, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1He means 10 were rejected just today.
- deadbaby, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2Don't like it, don't buy it. There are plenty of other choices. Just please stop crying about it.
- dazealex, on 06/24/2009, -0/+1Alright. I want an Atari 800 XL emulator. :-D
- randomdude287, on 07/04/2009, -0/+1***** commodore 64s. they are from the 1980s. this is the twenty first century people. there needs to be something better out for the iphone than a commodore 64 app.
- coxon, on 06/23/2009, -2/+3I have this for the Nokia E71 S60 3rd and it rocks! Load"*",8,1
- MizuhoChan, on 06/23/2009, -1/+2If it's because you can't run unsigned code, get Apple to look at it and make it only run signed games, then get the games, sign them and sell them for about 20 cents or something. More money and we get our games.
Although I don't have an iphone anyway... - akeldama, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1You 'think' less than 10 were rejected? Citation needed.
- desiv, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Yes, all of my best web exploits are written in Commodore BASIC!!
10 scan for vulnerable server
20 hack vulnerable server
30 print "I p0wnd U!";
run - Fleagleman, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Screw cocoa, give me some BASIC. Hells yeah. Nothing like a few 'goto' strings to really get me going.
- evanbaby, on 06/23/2009, -0/+0evanjacobs2008@yahoo.com
hello dear
my name is Evan Jacobs,i am a girl looking for a reliable person to share my life with,please i do not mean to bother you with my feelings for i have interest on you after going through your profile at and i will like us to know each other,if you will like to know more about me,reply me with your email address so that i can send you my photo to your email address and also tell you more about me. or you send me an email to my email address here, (evanjacobs2008@yahoo.com).i will be happy to see your response to my mail.
miss Evan. - SuSE, on 06/24/2009, -0/+0Man, just let it be Apple. C= almost bough Apple while ago, if things were different I am sure C= would lobe to have Apple emulator :)
- rdebath, on 06/23/2009, -1/+1This is a long winded way of saying that Apple sell the Iphone so they can tell you what you should do with it. That they deserve their 30% (pound of flesh) because the Iphone is cheap^H^H^H^H^H^H pretty.
You even admit the virus/crash the phone argument is bogus.
This is the DRM argument, round here it has the flight capability of a brick. - bfogarty27, on 06/23/2009, -2/+2this is why i love windows
but i am def jealous of the multitouch and the whole virtual joystiq idea. too bad no one can enjoy it - mrBitch, on 06/23/2009, -1/+1I agree, the Nokia E71 version is nice, but have you seen the demo of the iPhone version?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUQH24c63g8
That's the most beautiful emulator UI that I have ever seen... - zibberwiff, on 06/23/2009, -0/+0Exactly. That is all this is now, attention whoring. Clearly these guys don't have much intention of fixing the reasons they got rejected or even being accepted. Stirring ***** to create negativity towards Apple is hardly going to increase their chances - this immaturity is going to put them on a black list and they either don't care because they have some other agenda or they somehow don't realize it.
- dig1x, on 06/23/2009, -10/+10Pocket C64 for Windows Mobile... available for ~5+ years.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/catalog/pro ...
Oh, and WinMo also has Multitasking, SMS, Video Recording, Connection Sharing and Copy Paste for years too... - andrejhoward, on 06/23/2009, -0/+0I think what he meant was less than 10 rejected that did not get subsequently approved. Alot of Apps clean up what needs to be done and resubmit. Even AIM didn't get it right on the first try ...
- bfogarty27, on 06/23/2009, -2/+2i think he meant MMS which the iphone on att still doesnt have
and the newer phones such as the fuze and the touch pro 2 have plenty of memory so i can easily have 6 apps running with no problem. and i can choose from many user interfaces one which happens to be just like the iphone
the app store will be here soon but in the mean time there are plenty of apps out there which dont get banned :)
oh and i have a real keyboard
and an snes emulator -
Show 51 - 70 of 70 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is