dysamoria

Ah the old authoritarian excuse of “obey and you’ll be fine... (also, don’t question authority or defend those who’ve been abused by the system).”

Authoritarian-financed corporation says you’re fine, but they’re not responsible if you’re not, in fact, fine; after all, they can’t stop their authoritarian customers from “misusing” a spying tool they’ve sold to them for spying purposes.

🙄

I don’t understand why executables in an emulator are an issue. Aren’t they effectively sandboxed and incapable of impacting the host OS?

In the old days, Apple banned emulators. Then a bunch of corporate-developed emulators arrived and Apple must have changed the rules to appease the money that could come in via a legit-branded/licensed Atari emulator (I cant remember what brand it was), and then the limit was... ??? Only built-in games? No external addition of games?

They originally banned demos too, but what do we have now with the IAP system? Tons of apps that are basically just demos unless you pay (or pay MORE) inside the app to activate the features that make it more than a mere demo.

So long as you can get Apple in the loop on making more profit, apparently the rules will be adjusted to accommodate you as a developer.

larryjw said:

Rayz2016 said:

larryjw said:

I think Apple's guideline rejecting executing code is needs to be eliminated -- an emulator is an emulator. 

In reality, executing code in an emulator is what programs do. For example, PDF files are themselves computer programs which instruct and iPad how to render a PDF visually.

Isn't programs as data and data as programs the basic principle of computing? 

No, PDF is a document format. It doesn’t run, it’s rendered, same with music files. But that’s not the real problem. 

The emulator allows apps to run code that can’t be seen or examined by Apple, and that has always been against the rules. PDFs, the other hand, are pretty benign. It would be quite hard to piggyback an App Store in a PDF document. 

So the real problem is the lack of consistency in applying the rules. This should never have  been allowed in the App Store in the first place, so they’re going to look like real dicks for removing it now. 

No, a PDF is a program. Just because a PDF can be labeled a document doesn’t mean it’s not a program. You need to take abstraction up a level. 

A previous commenter also suggested that a program must be executed on the CPU. That’s also not correct.

In designing systems, one is always trading off between the “executable” and the “data”. Different languages tend to encourage marking the boundaries differently, but it remains that these boundaries between data and executable are quite arbitrary. 

In a micro programmed CPU, your “executable” is just data. To the hardware guys, the micro program is just data which drives NAND gates and voltage changes. 

It’s not an executable. That’s the issue. 

Rayz2016 said:

dysamoria said:

Uh, developers of “free apps”? Free as in loaded with ads or in-app purchases? Or were they *actually* free?

I do think Apple have changed from one company to another, and not for the better, but this specific argument of monopoly still doesn’t work. There’s something in there that’s anticompetitive practices, but monopoly isn’t really it.

Yup, “something in there”, but as usual, you don’t know what it is. 

I do and it’s irrelevant to this conversation. Get over yourself. I’m on Apple’s side here and it’s still not enough for you. Apple doesn’t need you defending them all day.

Somebody somewhere said “I envy software developers; what with being able to sell the same product over & over again with almost zero expenses... But I don’t want to make software. I want to be able to get money without actually doing any work!”

Someone else said: “I wish everything could be arbitrarily valued in a gambling system like the stock market!”

Someone else said: “I love the energy waste of bitcoin, and wish the wasteful stupidity could be brought to all markets!”

And then NFT was born to “supply” all these “demands”.