Consider things from the standpoint of Apple: they've spent millions of dollars building an ecosystem, programming APIs, developer tools, marketing it, etc. Now someone comes along, likely spends very little creating an emulator and developer tools from existing open source projects, and wants to tap into what you've created.
If stuff like this is allowed to happen unchallenged, why would any tech company bother putting in the time and money to do R&D and, you know, actually create things, when others can just come along and hijack it?
So you're saying the game belongs to Apple and the developers shouldn't be allowed to sell it anywhere else? Sounds silly doesn't it? Just because the folks at Bluestacks were inventive enough to find a way of making it easy for the devs to reach a new audience, avoiding a complete re-code on their part, it's wrong?
If you can remember what became of Mac clone maker Psystar, then you can imagine what will happen to this company.
That crossed my mind too, except in Psystar's case, the company was violating Mac OS X licensing terms. This console allegedly doesn't run any Apple code, so it's not clear to me what laws if any are being broken. If it requires a recompile, then it's little different than porting games between platforms, and it would be somewhat misleading on their part to advertise that it "runs iOS games," because it could lead their prospective customers to believe they're buying a product that can run ANY iOS game, not just those that have been specifically ported.
I[quote name="Tallest Skil" url="/t/157913/gamepop-console-to-run-ios-apps-without-using-any-apple-code#post_2340720"] That's just Mac OS 10.7, the successor to Mac OS 10.8. ;) [/quote
This ones a long shot but maybe 7 new things, but probably not.
iOS apps have a cryptographic signature in them to prevent tampering. If they've reverse engineered the app structure to make them work without modification on their console, then they're in a very greyish black legal area.
Seems they're saying they do have to modify it to run on their system. They've just invented a way to remove the extra effort from the devs to do so.
So you're saying the game belongs to Apple and the developers shouldn't be allowed to sell it anywhere else? Sounds silly doesn't it? Just because the folks at Bluestacks were inventive enough to find a way of making it easy for the devs to reach a new audience, avoiding a complete re-code on their part, it's wrong?
Amazing how you can put words into my mouth. I didn't say Apple owns the apps created for iOS. And I don't have a problem with the lack of reworking your app code to have it run on another platform. Heck, that was the whole point of Java programming language and the JavaVM.
The problem here is that they haven't actually done the work innovating and building a new platform for apps -- they've created an iOS emulator explicitly for the purpose of quickly and cheaply making money off of something Apple has spent a lot of time and money creating. Emulators have always been in a legally grey area for this very reason.
Amazing how you can put words into my mouth. I didn't say Apple owns the apps created for iOS. And I don't have a problem with the lack of reworking your app code to have it run on another platform. Heck, that was the whole point of Java programming language and the JavaVM.
The problem here is that they haven't actually innovated and actually built a new platform for apps -- they've created an iOS emulator explicitly for the purpose of quickly and cheaply making money off of something Apple has spent a lot of time and money creating. Emulators have always been in a legally grey area for this very reason.
Well of course Bluestack innovated! It doesn't happen by magic.
So let's make you an underpaid game dev instead of someone protecting Apple's back. Should you be able to put your game in any app store or on any platform regardless whether it requires a new coding effort from you personally? If not, why?
Consider things from the standpoint of Apple: they've spent millions of dollars building an OS, ecosystem, programming APIs, developer tools, marketing it, etc. Now someone comes along, likely spends very little creating an emulator and developer tools from existing open source projects, and wants to tap into what you've created.
If stuff like this is allowed to happen unchallenged, why would any tech company bother putting in the time and money to do R&D and, you know, actually create things, when others can just come along and hijack it?
Doesn't seem like they're tapping into anything Apple created. Apps are created by 3rd party devs and I'm sure they'd welcome the extra income.
So let's make you the game dev instead of protecting Apple's back. Should you be able to put your game in any app store or on any platform regardless whether it requires a new coding effort from you personally? If not, why?
FFS, you miss my point entirely with your spin. It's not about the freedom of devs to have their apps/games run on multiple platforms, it's about whether it's legal for a company to leech off the work done by another company by emulating the technology they've created.
FWIW, I do create apps for iOS (as well as other platforms), so I'm well aware of the effort it takes to port apps. I'm wholly supportive of anything which makes that easier. I'm just not supportive of doing it at the expense of others because I also know how difficult it is to build something from scratch.
So you're saying the game belongs to Apple and the developers shouldn't be allowed to sell it anywhere else? Sounds silly doesn't it? Just because the folks at Bluestacks were inventive enough to find a way of making it easy for the devs to reach a new audience, avoiding a complete re-code on their part, it's wrong?
Inventive might be overly flattering. But I agree that this is still a pretty deft feat, whether they are shut down legally or not and whether it is commercially viable. It's a shame that the folks herein have no appreciation for clever engineering. I realize there are few technically competent members here. But there are equally few folks who know the law or who are savvy businessmen. Yet they do not hesitate to opine on and argue the finer points of economics and lawsuits. Go figure.
Comments
Originally Posted by THEMAC1NT0SH
That's just Mac OS 10.7, the successor to Mac OS 10.8.
So you're saying the game belongs to Apple and the developers shouldn't be allowed to sell it anywhere else? Sounds silly doesn't it? Just because the folks at Bluestacks were inventive enough to find a way of making it easy for the devs to reach a new audience, avoiding a complete re-code on their part, it's wrong?
That crossed my mind too, except in Psystar's case, the company was violating Mac OS X licensing terms. This console allegedly doesn't run any Apple code, so it's not clear to me what laws if any are being broken. If it requires a recompile, then it's little different than porting games between platforms, and it would be somewhat misleading on their part to advertise that it "runs iOS games," because it could lead their prospective customers to believe they're buying a product that can run ANY iOS game, not just those that have been specifically ported.
That's just Mac OS 10.7, the successor to Mac OS 10.8. ;)
[/quote
This ones a long shot but maybe 7 new things, but probably not.
Seems they're saying they do have to modify it to run on their system. They've just invented a way to remove the extra effort from the devs to do so.
I expect a cease and desist letter is already on it's way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
So you're saying the game belongs to Apple and the developers shouldn't be allowed to sell it anywhere else? Sounds silly doesn't it? Just because the folks at Bluestacks were inventive enough to find a way of making it easy for the devs to reach a new audience, avoiding a complete re-code on their part, it's wrong?
Amazing how you can put words into my mouth. I didn't say Apple owns the apps created for iOS. And I don't have a problem with the lack of reworking your app code to have it run on another platform. Heck, that was the whole point of Java programming language and the JavaVM.
The problem here is that they haven't actually done the work innovating and building a new platform for apps -- they've created an iOS emulator explicitly for the purpose of quickly and cheaply making money off of something Apple has spent a lot of time and money creating. Emulators have always been in a legally grey area for this very reason.
Apple didn't write the apps nor owns them
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Apple didn't write the apps nor owns them
You're just joking at this point.
Well of course Bluestack innovated! It doesn't happen by magic.
So let's make you an underpaid game dev instead of someone protecting Apple's back. Should you be able to put your game in any app store or on any platform regardless whether it requires a new coding effort from you personally? If not, why?
Doesn't seem like they're tapping into anything Apple created. Apps are created by 3rd party devs and I'm sure they'd welcome the extra income.
But I must say that is a very convincing picture.
Also, do you mean the predecessor to Mac OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion), which is Lion? I'm sure that Apple never really use number logos for Mac OS X.
That means that picture is quite real to me.
P.S. That '7' logo does look quite pleasing; I hope iOS 7 is promising...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
So let's make you the game dev instead of protecting Apple's back. Should you be able to put your game in any app store or on any platform regardless whether it requires a new coding effort from you personally? If not, why?
FFS, you miss my point entirely with your spin. It's not about the freedom of devs to have their apps/games run on multiple platforms, it's about whether it's legal for a company to leech off the work done by another company by emulating the technology they've created.
FWIW, I do create apps for iOS (as well as other platforms), so I'm well aware of the effort it takes to port apps. I'm wholly supportive of anything which makes that easier. I'm just not supportive of doing it at the expense of others because I also know how difficult it is to build something from scratch.
Explain to me how they do.
You simply create a set of APIs that mimic the signatures of the APIs that Apple provide.
That's what the ReactOS project is aiming to do with Windows NT.
The application will have no idea it's not running on Apple's architecture.
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Explain to me how they do.
Do I really have to post the dancing image again? Stop playing stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
So you're saying the game belongs to Apple and the developers shouldn't be allowed to sell it anywhere else? Sounds silly doesn't it? Just because the folks at Bluestacks were inventive enough to find a way of making it easy for the devs to reach a new audience, avoiding a complete re-code on their part, it's wrong?
Inventive might be overly flattering. But I agree that this is still a pretty deft feat, whether they are shut down legally or not and whether it is commercially viable. It's a shame that the folks herein have no appreciation for clever engineering. I realize there are few technically competent members here. But there are equally few folks who know the law or who are savvy businessmen. Yet they do not hesitate to opine on and argue the finer points of economics and lawsuits. Go figure.