

Full Commodore 64 Emulator Rejected from App Store - spicyj
http://toucharcade.com/2009/06/20/full-commodore-64-emulator-rejected-from-app-store/

======
tophat02
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).

~~~
ramidarigaz
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).

~~~
Tichy
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.

~~~
jemmons
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.

------
augustus
After a few months of in the App store, I am finally realizing the realities.

A month ago they told me I had information that would be confusing across
regions. I changed it immediately but they have not reviewed the app again.

I have send at least a dozen emails asking them for a review to no avail.

And this is a business app. So if anyone thought getting in was the biggest
thing, think again.

This review was probably fair but then again, I have personally found dealing
with the review team to be highly frustrating.

~~~
tlrobinson
Good luck. I kid you not, I just got a response for a question I asked in
_November_. Yes, 7 months ago.

------
jimboyoungblood
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.

~~~
spicyj
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.

------
ghshephard
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."

~~~
wmf
Exactly. Apple doesn't allow anything _called_ an emulator.

------
greyfade
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.

This is disgusting on every level.

~~~
anon123456
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.

------
qslug
Thanks to Google's market policy we Android users have a wide variety of
emulators to chose from including NES, SNES, Genesis, Scumm, C64, and more...

~~~
dejb
And windows mobile has had these for years.

------
ryanwaggoner
_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.

~~~
prodigal_erik
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?

~~~
ryanwaggoner
Seems like you have four options:

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?

------
ars
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.

------
scscsc
I see two issues here:

* 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.

