Slashdot Mirror


Apple Pulls C64 Emulator From the App Store

Rob Hearn sends in a piece up at PocketGamer.co.uk on why Apple suddenly pulled Manomio's C64 emulator soon after finally approving it. (El Reg has coverage too.) "It was a glorious few moments for retro gamers when Manomio's C64 emulator was finally approved by Apple and released to the eager, nostalgic iPhone public. Then, calamity! It was gone again. Apparently some wily users figured out how to access the Commodore 64 BASIC system that was originally packaged with the emulator — something that Apple wasn't too happy with, given the nature of the interpreter's code. By setting the keyboard to 'always on,' launching a game and restarting BASIC, players got into the 'empty shell' of their C64 emulator."

580 comments

  1. And then what? by Jason+daHaus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously? What? What can you do from a C64 shell on an iPhone?

    1. Re:And then what? by Anonymous+Cowar · · Score: 5, Informative

      it probably duplicates core functionality in the loosest sense of the term. I.E. turns it into a "computer" that people can then "use" to "get stuff done". Then BAM! duplicate functionality.

    2. Re:And then what? by babyrat · · Score: 4, Informative

      I believe at least one of the problems is that with access to the basic interpreter could be used to start illegally obtained games.

    3. Re:And then what? by ananamouse · · Score: 1

      Decades ago (literally) I trained my C64 to perform all the contour mapping algorithims in Davis, "Statistics and Data Analysis in Geology." I also had it doing log analysis computations and plots. I have an old copy of GEOS somewhere, I wonder if that would run on the emulator?

    4. Re:And then what? by Mechanik · · Score: 5, Funny

      Seriously? What? What can you do from a C64 shell on an iPhone?

      The same thing everyone used to do with the C64 out in front of Radio Shack back in the day...

      10 PRINT "PENIS!!!!!!"
      20 GOTO 10

    5. Re:And then what? by texwtf · · Score: 1

      LOAD "$", 8
      DIR

      Actually have access to the filesystem, how dare we!

      Just a guess.

    6. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The point is you arent allowed to have any sort of dynamic, interpreted code at all. No java, no .net runtime, no assembly interpreter, no scripts, no nothing.

      You see, it opens the door for people to write their own C64 basic phones and run them on the iPhone, without - gasp - Steve Jobs approving, or getting paid! I could write my own "lemonade stand" game, and distribute it, OUTSIDE OF APPLES OFFICIAL CHANNELS?

      THE APPALLING HORROR OF AN OPEN PLATFORM!

      BTW, you can do a whole lot from a c64 shell when you're clever.. You're obviously too young to know.

    7. Re:And then what? by jcr · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, they banned it because they prohibit any language interpreters. What anyone wants to do with those interpreters is beside the point.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    8. Re:And then what? by Jason+daHaus · · Score: 1

      Well - I'm 29 - so C64 was something I played games on when I was 8 or so. I didn't start tinkering with programming until a few years after that.

    9. Re:And then what? by stasike · · Score: 2, Informative


      10 PRINT "What is your name?"
      20 INPUT A$
      30 PRINT "Hello " A$

      You see? You can use it to write programs.
      Very dangerous! They can *not* let that happen.

    10. Re:And then what? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seriously? What? What can you do from a C64 shell on an iPhone?

      If you'd ever watched Macgyver, you wouldn't ask that question.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    11. Re:And then what? by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Informative

      That was Sears. Radio Shack was where you programmed the TRS-80 in the endless penis loop.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    12. Re:And then what? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 5, Funny

      Among a certain crowd, that program passes the Turing test.

    13. Re:And then what? by fyrie · · Score: 3, Informative

      GEOS runs on most C64 emus so I'd have to guess yes. However, you can only execute the disk images that are available in the appstore. LAME.

    14. Re:And then what? by mini+me · · Score: 1

      They have not banned this Brainfuck interpreter. http://itunes.com/apps/brainfudge Hurray for App Store inconsistencies.

    15. Re:And then what? by hansamurai · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You could write an app store for the C64, featuring C64 only games, but then Apple wouldn't get the cut.

    16. Re:And then what? by Stele · · Score: 3, Funny

      But that might lead to someone experimenting with

      30 PRINT "Hello " A$$

      And that spells a naughty word. Can't have that!!

    17. Re:And then what? by jandrese · · Score: 2, Funny

      They probably just have a ban on useful interpreters.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    18. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, if you want to see what a C64 is capable of, come to
      the Vintage Computer Festival this weekend:

      http://www.vintage.org/2009/east/

      There will be several C64s on exhibit, available for hands on
      experimentation.

    19. Re:And then what? by multipartmixed · · Score: 0

      PENIS!

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    20. Re:And then what? by PenisLands · · Score: 1

      Heh heh! PENIS!

    21. Re:And then what? by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      Bah. Even McGyver fans wouldn't be able to do anything with that. At the very least they'd need a roll of duct tape or a paper clip as well.

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    22. Re:And then what? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Not on the iPhone.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    23. Re:And then what? by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Funny

      The first iteration of Artificial Insanity, a joke Turing test I wrote back in 1982 that answered any question you asked, in context, with a smartassed answer, was originally written in Sinclair BASIC. One friend running the DOS version years later (written in dBase and compiled with Clipper) got so frustrated with the smartassed thing he broke his keyboard, he typed so hard.

      Imagine what you'd do to an iPhone with it.

    24. Re:And then what? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

      Among a certain crowd, that program passes the Turing test.

      Unlike vagina, penis would certainly pass at least Turing's test.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    25. Re:And then what? by nasalicio · · Score: 1

      dont forget the swiss army knife!

    26. Re:And then what? by Sarusa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Okay, treating this whole story more seriously than Apple's stupid deserves:

      The evil they fear is user generated content that bypass the app approval process. Like shaking a baby to death with giant flying dongs while 'Heil Hitler Satan' scrolls in the background. Or worse, writing a clone of some copyrighted game. Or even worse, using emulated SID to play copyrighted music. BASIC would let you do that. This is presumably what they fear.

      Now there's nothing to stop you from writing this game on your C64 without BASIC, creating an image, and then just running it in the emulator, as far as I can tell. Other than needing to know 6502 assembly, which is no big deal. But nobody ever accused the App Store monkeys of consistency.

    27. Re:And then what? by rossdee · · Score: 1

      I think you had to use the command
      LIST

      after loading the directory.

      Of course if you could have access to a 1541 drive with it, you could maybe play games...

      (Typing in a gam in machine code from an old Compute! magazine is another possibty., but you'd probably run out of battery power before getting it typed in.

    28. Re:And then what? by Evro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Radio Shack is where you do a "format c:" on whatever computer they have on display... then get banned from the store. :(

      --
      rooooar
    29. Re:And then what? by ArieKremen · · Score: 3, Informative

      The commands PEEK and POKE come to mind...

      --
      -- Cave quid dicis, quando, et cui
    30. Re:And then what? by greenguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This summarizes why I don't own an iPhone. They're very slick and all, but I've been spoiled by running Linux for years. The concept of needing someone's approval to run software on my hardware is a non-starter for me. I'll decide that for myself, thanks very much.

      --
      What if I do the same thing, and I do get different results?
    31. Re:And then what? by icebraining · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, you can only run a specific set os C64 games/apps, supported by the emulator developers.

    32. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you elaborate on that?

    33. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      But you can interpret a linux scheduler with it!

    34. Re:And then what? by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 2, Informative

      Seriously? What? What can you do from a C64 shell on an iPhone?

      "peek" and "poke"

    35. Re:And then what? by prockcore · · Score: 1

      Then why do they allow Frotz on there? There's even BaZic, which is BASIC for Z-Machines.

      More likely they banned it because C64 BASIC is made by Microsoft.

    36. Re:And then what? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Something Apple can't charge you for, apparently.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    37. Re:And then what? by MBGMorden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Format c: didn't apply to the TRS 80 (aka the "Trash 80" as it was often called :)).

      Interestingly enough "way back in the day" when I had my own C64 my aunt had a TRS-80 that she'd bought for my cousins to use. They were older than me by a ways (and only 1 year apart from each other), so they both graduated shortly after the computer was purchased. She ended up just giving the thing to me since I'd been over there to mess with it quite a bit. To a young kid who was already well into geekdom just getting an extra computer back then to play on was just awesome.

      Looking back, no, I didn't like it as much as my Commodore, but it was still fun. One of my best pranks as a kid was to write a BASIC program for that TRS-80 and left sitting in memory. Somehow I coaxed my cousin to run it later and it printed out a nice connection string about connecting to a classified DoD computer and after the two of us spending 10 minutes trying to guess the password (after which I let the correct out just slip out :)) it logged in and started displaying "top secret documents" on how they'd really found aliens on the moon during the Apollo missions. She got freaked out for a while before I finally let her in on the joke. It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    38. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      GEOS runs on most C64 emus so I'd have to guess yes. However, you can only execute the disk images that are available in the appstore. LAME.

      LAME? MP3 encoding on a C64? Cool!

    39. Re:And then what? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Among a certain crowd, that program passes the Turing test.

      Now now, let's not ruffle Youtube's feathers.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    40. Re:And then what? by Sarusa · · Score: 1

      I guess that was another limitation they were forced to negotiate, then, for the same reasons. Gad that's evil.

      Thanks for the info, I stand corrected.

    41. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Execute your code, making the platform much more useful than a stupid terminal the user has no control on.
      Take this as a first taste of cloud computing. There's so much people around that will believe this is a good thing and will pay for this atrocious reduction in functionality.

    42. Re:And then what? by Satanicolas · · Score: 1, Funny

      i use to print cunt on a ti99/4a

    43. Re:And then what? by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sir, please remove your head from there. Mr. Jobs wishes to turn around without breaking your neck.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    44. Re:And then what? by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      About 80% of my friends/family still appear to live in that age.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    45. Re:And then what? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I think they fear waking up to the news that a wide-spread vulnerability affected n million iPhone users.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    46. Re:And then what? by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, they banned it because they are dickwads. Any reason they give is merely cover for this fact.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    47. Re:And then what? by pedrop357 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not their product. It's mine. I don't buy things that not only don't function the way I want but also actively deny my ability to change it's function.

      If I want to perform differently, I better have the option to turn or ability to modify it do so.

      My car (05 WRX) has a vast aftermarket for people who want something different. There's even open source software to alter engine operations www.romraider.com.

      My TV can be opened and rewired. Maybe I want more speakers, maybe I want to integrate it into my wall. Whatever.

      This doesn't even include the people who have JTAG programmers and alter all sorts of household appliances.

    48. Re:And then what? by hardcache · · Score: 1

      Is that what you are learning on the Internets? The vast success of the iPhone & App Store in both number of useful Apps and profit for both developers and Apple have shown the business model to be successful. Now it needs refining - but not in the angry knee jerk reactionary way of bloggers and forum gripers.

    49. Re:And then what? by LandDolphin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't rewire or alter your car, but you coudl if you wanted too. There is a whole culture of people that do.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    50. Re:And then what? by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      C'mon now, that's below the belt.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    51. Re:And then what? by deepershade · · Score: 1

      I vaguely remember CAT being used at some point in listing files. But it was a long time ago and it was on an amstrad 464.

    52. Re:And then what? by StikyPad · · Score: 5, Funny

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      Yeah, we're way more savvy these... OHHH, A talking moose wants my credit card number! That's only fair.

    53. Re:And then what? by saboola · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, a little "LOAD "*",8,1" in basic and all of a sudden iPhone OS is being wiped and replaced with GEOS.

    54. Re:And then what? by synthmob · · Score: 1

      Radio Shack only ever sold Tandy computers... not C64s

    55. Re:And then what? by geek_by_default · · Score: 1

      Actually this looks better
      10 PRINT "PENIS!!!!!!";
      20 GOTO 10

    56. Re:And then what? by Crystalmonkey · · Score: 1

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      This changed when exactly?

    57. Re:And then what? by StikyPad · · Score: 0

      That summarizes why I jailbroke my iPhone. Took all of 5 minutes. Sure, it could be "fixed" in a future iPhone OS update, but there's nothing that says I have to update. It took a bit longer to bypass the "official developer" signing requirements, but seriously.. if you're a Linux user, complaining about having to use obscure hacks is the ultimate in pot-kettle diametrical thinking.

    58. Re:And then what? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      C'mon now, that's below the belt.

      That would depend on its length, wouldn't it?

      (Disclaimer: I'm very fond of Turing and his work. And I have no problems with his orientation, be it vertical or horizontal. My tendency to make silly jokes is a result of suffering from ioculitis inepta - a rather severe congenital disorder.)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    59. Re:And then what? by AnalPerfume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Duplicating functionality? I wonder if "copy & paste" could be described as that? Maybe that's why it was missing from the iPhone when it first appeared. Then again, if it could be classed as that, Apple seem to be contradicting their own rules. /sarcasm.

      Seriously, this is just one in a long list of stories which suggest Apple are barmy. Each new example of a Stalin-like appreciation of freedom sees another few previously loyal Apple customers cringe and refuse to defend Apple as they once did. People have tipping points they may not even recognize, at some point they will say "enough is enough" and take a stand against the authority figure they see as unnecessarily restricting some free choices.

      Maybe Apple believe they have the smart phone market sewn up, and between the lock in and heavy marketing they can afford to piss customers off. That may well change when Android has a few years maturity on the market and Apple find themselves a niche option for people willing to pay the Apple premium. Maybe by that time the damage will be done, and Apple will have plenty of disgruntled ex-customers who won't buy Apple again, the same way Microsoft have created a LOT of ex-Windows users who won't touch Windows again.

    60. Re:And then what? by uberjack · · Score: 1

      Anyone else feel like it'd be better if Apple did their own app development, instead of jerk-slapping random developers on the wrist whenever they felt like it? I'd love to see a class-action lawsuit against Apple's ever-changing arbitrary app inclusion process.

    61. Re:And then what? by jgardia · · Score: 1

      Well, I rewired (partially) my car, and built my own stereo. And I do that because I like it. And no one forbid me to do that.

    62. Re:And then what? by Tweenk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A few weeks ago I found a Linux laptop on display in an electronics store, logged into the root shell. The urge to type in 'dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda1" or "rm -rf /" was very hard to resist.

      --
      Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
    63. Re:And then what? by changa · · Score: 2, Insightful


      sys 49152

    64. Re:And then what? by itsdapead · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Write arbitrary code.

      Which is against Apple's T&Cs.

      Because the iPhone isn't intended to be an all-purpose pocket computer - its a phone and music player.

      Apple's fear is that people will install buggy apps that screw up the phone, and then blame Apple. No conspiracy needed. If they were purely interested in lock-out they'd never have approved Spotify.

      If Apple allowed apps that ran arbitrary code they'd have to check not just the C64 emu but every app with a macro or scripting facility to ensure that they were adequately sandboxed. That would be a lot of work.

      If you want a phone where, if you break it, you get to keep both pieces, go buy an Android phone or (if you want to lose the will to live) Windows Mobile.

      Disclaimer, I have an Android phone, and an iPod Touch (iPhone without a phone) and am looking for a sufficiently deep hole in which to cast my old WM phone. So I'm not a complete fanboi.

      Meanwhile, this guy agreed to remove BASIC but either deliberately or negligently left it in. I'd rather not install their software, in case they negligently or deliberately left anything els in, thanks.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    65. Re:And then what? by Mechanik · · Score: 1

      Actually I think that here in Canada, they also sold Commodores eventually. It's hard to find hard data to cite, but I think after they killed off the CoCos in 1991, they briefly had Commodores, until they switched to PCs. I have pretty distinct memories of having seen people do this prank out in front of a Radio Shack around here on a C64. If my memory is correct about this, then it would definitely not have been a very long time that they had them, because they were building PCs in 1992.

    66. Re:And then what? by Wolfier · · Score: 1

      How about Javascript? AFAIK Safari on iPHone even supports Canvas. Wouldn't that create an alternate platform anyway?

    67. Re:And then what? by Mechanik · · Score: 1

      Actually I think that here in Canada, they also sold Commodores eventually. It's hard to find hard data to cite, but I think after they killed off the CoCos in 1991, they briefly had Commodores, until they switched to PCs. I have pretty distinct memories of having seen people do this prank out in front of a Radio Shack around here on a C64. If my memory is correct about this, then it would definitely not have been a very long time that they had them, because they were building PCs in 1992. But anyway, the joke still stands :-p

    68. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Shoot yourself in the head. Something big enough to make your skull resemble and exploding watermelon.

      Feel free to show us exactly how you want it done!

    69. Re:And then what? by risk+one · · Score: 2

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      Yes, those days are definitely behind us...

      What's this, I'm the 10.000th visitor to dodgycrackwarez.cz? My goodness, I've won a prize, how exciting!

    70. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fergot...

      10 PRINT "PENIS!!!!!! ";
      20 GOTO 10

    71. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      apple looses all control over content. game over for their quest for world domination.... damn and i was just getting ready to type in one of those games from and old copy of "BYTE" magazine ....

    72. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30 RUN! goddamit RUN!

    73. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      I don't think much has changed, really... :)

    74. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      The Nigerians and penis pill pushers will tell you that age is still not over.

    75. Re:And then what? by andymadigan · · Score: 1

      I can install anything I want on my G1, even things T-Mo doesn't approve of like Tetherbot. A lot of phones out there aren't really powerful enough to do anything interesting. The iPhone, G1 and Windows Mobile phones are. Of those three, I only know of one that requires applications to be approved.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    76. Re:And then what? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      More fun was:
      poke 120,0

      This had the effect of disabling the command interpreter, meaning that all future commands (including pokes and saves) had no effect. I got the dirtiest looks when I told people about that command and they tried it--without saving their work first.

    77. Re:And then what? by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      I experimented in AppleBASIC programming by re-creating the computer displays from various television programs and movies: Doctor Who had a lot to imitate, so did War Games. In fact, I wrote a Global Thermonuclear War simulator using HGR, and a (poor) guess at how the Biological War program might have been implemented in GR mode. [Turns out, I created something not unlike a one-way Conway's Life.]

      But yeah, I remember a friend had come over one afternoon, and I ran the Global Thermonuclear War program. When it got to the "countdown to launch" section, he flipped out, thinking the program really was running at NORAD or something. He was actually pissed when I let him in on the joke. And I just thought it was clever programming...

    78. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You insensitive clod - at this point some of us are too old to remember.

    79. Re:And then what? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Did you really need to say that?

      I mean, they wear turtle necks.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    80. Re:And then what? by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      MIGHTIER!

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    81. Re:And then what? by pigphish · · Score: 1

      They are not the police and they shouldn't be trying to police what bad things can come from good things. They should be selling software. The reason is more likely that they are control freaks and not noble. Apple the spoiled preferred child really IMHO is as bad if not worse than MS in having a closed system. Their sheep of users always give them a free ride.

    82. Re:And then what? by thebjorn · · Score: 1

      I got my C64 in 1982, so that seems very late... ps: sys 647382

    83. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's your 'vast aftermarket' for people who wand something different on their iphone.

      http://cydia.saurik.com/

      Now stop your fucking whining.

    84. Re:And then what? by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Seriously? What? What can you do from a C64 shell on an iPhone?

      You can violate the app store rules by running a general purpose BASIC interpreter.

      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).

      You could, for example, type '10 PRINT "BOOBIES!"', press "R", "SHIFT", "U" and "ENTER" and suddenly have possibly objectionable content on your iPhone which has not been screened by the Elders of Cupertino. Even worse, you could bring out a stack of Compute's Gazettes and type in a whole lot more software that Apple never even dreamed of approving, and that lets you shortcut the whole approval process.

      That would be bad, in case you lost track somewhere. Apple doesn't like that and does not want to set a precedent for selling "Jailbreak" apps through their own app store.

    85. Re:And then what? by sharperguy · · Score: 3, Funny

      But LAME Ain't an MP3 Encoder!

      --
      "sudo rm -rf your-face"
    86. Re:And then what? by QuantumLeaper · · Score: 1

      Version 1 of BASIC for the Pet was programmed by Microsoft all the other version were programmed by Commodore but they used the same syntax for a lot of the commands.

    87. Re:And then what? by WiFiBro · · Score: 2, Informative

      At least add

      6 FOR I=1 TO 15
      7 POKE 53281,I
      8 FOR J=1 TO 15
      9 POKE 53280,J
      12 NEXT J
      13 PAUSE 1
      15 NEXT I

      and change 20 to GOTO 6

    88. Re:And then what? by jlebrech · · Score: 1

      You can store the source code to Commodore 64 games, then copy and paste them into the shell; circumventing the drm.

    89. Re:And then what? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, but you can compile anything into anything. There probably isn't a whole lot to stop people from writing a Java to BrainFuck compiler, and then using the generated code to feed into the iPhone.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    90. Re:And then what? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Disclaimer, I have an Android phone, and an iPod Touch (iPhone without a phone) and am looking for a sufficiently deep hole in which to cast my old WM phone. So I'm not a complete fanboi.

      I was close to getting an Android phone. But then I realized the T-Mobile service around me stunk, and didn't like that idea.

      Then I considered getting one unlocked (either through Google Developer or after a few months on T-Mobile) but learned that Google locked out the copyrighted apps from their store. Wasn't a major fan of that, though it didn't 100% stop me.

      The final straw was the scrollball. I had one on a Blackberry Pearl that cr@pped out and it drove me nuts. I figured it was just bad luck.

      But then the trackball on a floor model at a T-Mobile store was also screwed up.

      So between T-Mobile, Google's anti-unlocked stance, and the scrollball I decided to ignore it for now. It may sound petty, but the 3 things combined were enough to get me to stop.

      Other than that, nice phone. In the end though I went iPhone.

      Maybe the next time around.

    91. Re:And then what? by wgoodman · · Score: 1

      is the paperclip so he can get his simcard out and put into a different phone?

    92. Re:And then what? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      It'll probably run just fine until Apple pulls support for logarithms.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    93. Re:And then what? by BOBSta · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they left in all the "features" that Microsoft put in there too. Seriously, Commodore didn't produce a decent basic until they released the 128 and that was still worse than BBC Basic.

    94. Re:And then what? by loshwomp · · Score: 1

      C'mon now, that's below the belt.

      Depends. If it's a high school student, then the belt might be quite a bit lower.

    95. Re:And then what? by Draek · · Score: 1

      Because the iPhone isn't intended to be an all-purpose pocket computer - its a phone and music player.

      One would guess, then, that they wouldn't have built their phone and music player out of computer parts, software included.

      Somehow, it seems as if Apple's dream is to create and sell non-Turing complete Turing machines, which is only sightly less stupid than the RIAA's dream of having DRM that allows the consumer to access the data without letting him do so.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    96. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? Here I am in the position of wanting to play illegally obtained retro games, I have two choices:

      1) I jailbreak the device and get a cracked version of this C64 emulator and a shitload of ROMs (not to mention a SNES or GBA emulator as an added bonus, to mention a few).
      2) I pay for a commercially distributed application with the intent of running "unauthorized" code and later realize that the filesystem is sandboxed and it's not going to work.

      Hm, this is harder than I thought, give me some time to figure it out and I'll get back to you!

    97. Re:And then what? by JohnBailey · · Score: 1

      Somehow I coaxed my cousin to run it later and it printed out a nice connection string about connecting to a classified DoD computer and after the two of us spending 10 minutes trying to guess the password (after which I let the correct out just slip out :)) it logged in and started displaying "top secret documents" on how they'd really found aliens on the moon during the Apollo missions. She got freaked out for a while before I finally let her in on the joke. It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      Back when I was using DOS, I made a simple little program that displayed a C prompt, and allowed any input, but as soon as you pressed return, it threw up a while bunch of errors and looked like the computer was going onto meltdown. After a few requests for permission to do diagnostics and scary looking progress bars, it stopped and displayed a gotcha screen. Few people ever got that for though. Always fun to watch people go from bored to terrified, followed by hastily turning the computer off and quickly and quietly walking away. Tried it on a neighbour's kids and the look of sheer horror on their faces was classic.

      --
      It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
    98. Re:And then what? by SchizoStatic · · Score: 1

      Uh and a blackberry as well

      --
      https://www.speakservers.com/
    99. Re:And then what? by gilesjuk · · Score: 1

      Exploit bugs in the software code to unlock the phone?

      It's a long shot but might be possible.

    100. Re:And then what? by supersat · · Score: 1

      You don't even need access to the BASIC interpreter to do that.

    101. Re:And then what? by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Back when I was using DOS, I made a simple little program that displayed a C prompt, and allowed any input, but as soon as you pressed return, it threw up a while bunch of errors and looked like the computer was going onto meltdown. After a few requests for permission to do diagnostics and scary looking progress bars, it stopped and displayed a gotcha screen. Few people ever got that for though. Always fun to watch people go from bored to terrified, followed by hastily turning the computer off and quickly and quietly walking away. Tried it on a neighbour's kids and the look of sheer horror on their faces was classic.

      My dad's computer at his company used a custom DOS program written in Pascal. I fired up Turbo Pascal and simulated the login and initial menu options perfectly with my own program. I then slipped that program ahead the real login exe in the autoexec.bat file, and waited for Monday for the fun to begin. The program was designed to log in, but after a few key-presses, the computer starting spitting garbage on the screen, and then displayed a very scary warning talking about data corruption on the server, etc. After I heard him holler for me, I entered a secret "password", and the computer displayed a little animation telling him he'd been had.

      Yeah, he was kind of pissed. I'm not sure he's quite forgiven me for that one.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    102. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      and I can "rewire" my iPhone if I wanted, like I stated. It can be easily unlocked, and doesn't have the same "brick" risk as it initially did.

    103. Re:And then what? by Zoolander · · Score: 1

      It's funny because it's true. +5, Informative

      --
      Meep.
    104. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No, they banned it because they are dickwads. Any reason they give is merely cover for this fact."

      Funny? Really? This is nothing but flamebait. Mods?

      They banned it because it's an interpreter, meaning it gives people a little too much control over the software and potentially the hardware on the phone. You may not like it, but if you bought it, you signed the contract, you have no excuses. I think the only folks who get all worked up about this are the Linux crowd wanting everything to be 'free' and 'open' without understanding that it is designed to be a closed system and it's vastly successful. Apple has no reason to open source their phone.

      Honestly I think the vast 99.8 % majority of folks could really care less about a C64 emulator on an iPhone. About the only thing you could do that would be useful with it would be some very low-res games that could easily be duplicated much better by any number of the 50,000 some odd, hardware specific offerings offerings out there, or they hack the system which would only be of interest to folks with that bent. Most folks don't demand an open phone. They just want to make a few phone calls every now and then, get some e-mail, drop in a ring tone, and change the wallpaper, all of which are done well enough given the populatrity of the phone.

      Stop making this out to be some conspiracy. If you can't understand why they would block an interpreter, you shouldn't be on /.

    105. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it is not your product. You do not own the product, the IP, anything at all to do with the product. You have a "right to use," and that's it. You couldn't take it and reverse-engineer it, replicating it in your own Chinese factories. There are a *lot* of things you know you cannot legally do to it.

      What you can do, however, is unlock the thing and install whatever you want on it. You're not stopped from doing this. The updates don't work well for it, but the updates are for a specific image, and unlocking it changes that image; if I install an nvidia driver for linux and then update my kernel through a normal package manager, guess what? I won't have dual-screen anymore (since I'm using VMs...). So, I have to set up the driver again - just like you would need to unlock the iPhone again if you wanted to install an update. You will not - at all - be at risk of going to jail for unlocking your iPhone. You will not have broken a single law. You won't have even voided the warranty on it. There is *absolutely nothing* stopping you from doing it, so far as civil or criminal activities are concerned, if you want to do it. Which means, if you want to complain...it's because you merely want to complain.

      The sense of entitlement in the newer OSS community members is just...sickening, really. I don't go burning down butcher shops because I'm vegetarian. A valid complain about the iPhone is the poor performance of the 3g network and the poor lifespan of the battery. But the rest of it? Just childish.

      Mod me -3 troll again if you like, mods - but the "insightful" people saying they want everything and anything for free and without limitations...well, those are the trolls, imnsho. You get an iPhone...it is NOT YOUR PRODUCT. To say that...wow. Yeah.

    106. Re:And then what? by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Absolutely true. I know many Apple employees personally, and if there is one thing I can say that is true about every last one of them, it's that they are absolute dicks. They will pull software shenanigans left and right with wanton disregard -- nay, hostility -- toward their users. I'm sure, like you said, it was pure unreasoned malice on the part of Apple employees.

    107. Re:And then what? by chill · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, this guy agreed to remove BASIC but either deliberately or negligently left it in.

      You can't *remove* BASIC from the C-64 because it was used to bootstrap the loading process of everything else. No BASIC, no way to load the games. Something has to interpret LOAD "*",8,1. You can lock it out once it bootstraps the other programs, which is what it looks like he tried -- and failed -- to completely do.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    108. Re:And then what? by ElKry · · Score: 1

      Wait, how would it depend on its length? Unless you're using a hardened Turing test, it would always be bellow the belt.

    109. Re:And then what? by Genrou · · Score: 1

      LAME? MP3 encoding on a C64? Cool!

      It's not that. A C64 has less space than a Nomad and no wireless. Thus, lame.

    110. Re:And then what? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      They discovered someone could do this:

      10 PRINT "APPLE SUCKS!"
      20 GOTO 10

    111. Re:And then what? by soundguy · · Score: 1

      Considering that this is the 21st century, I'm guessing that /dev/Sda would have been a lot more useful :-)

      --
      Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
    112. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't BrainFuck designed to be cryptographically difficult to program for?

    113. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I"P" is a lie. Your whole argument is because you've accepted that lie as reality.

      If I have something physical, it is MINE. I will do with it as I will.

    114. Re:And then what? by Jawn98685 · · Score: 1

      It was kinda fun to live in that age when people were gullible enough to accept ANYTHING that popped up on screen.

      They had Fox News back in those days?

    115. Re:And then what? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      The nvidea driver is available through normal package repos is most desktop linux distros. So no you don;t need to setup anything again.

      Also you pay for an iPhone, you buying it is a sign to apple saying you support their crippling of the device. I rather vote otherwise with my cash.

      It would be like you buying meat even though you are a vegetarian.

    116. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 0, Troll

      no, IP is unethical and flawed. But it is not a "lie." It does in fact exist. If you are honest in your quest for an Open Society, you will want to engage in activities that lend to that society. But just as ELF doesn't actually benefit the planet (and instead, harms it quite frequently), and ALF doesn't actually help animals (again, harms additional animals instead) - you too are being counterproductive to the cause for which you are supposedly fighting.

      There are various reasons that would account for being counter-productive to your own cause, but none are very flattering so I won't bother with them here. What I will do though is point out the flaw in what you're saying, since I am an actual advocate of the cause, and wish you'd stop harming it so much.

    117. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple's fear is that people will install buggy apps that screw up the phone, and then blame Apple. No conspiracy needed. If they were purely interested in lock-out they'd never have approved Spotify.

      And one need only jailbreak their iPhone to see this - there are plenty of apps that will wreak havoc on your iPhone's operating system.

      The more I think about it, the more I agree with Apple's stance - the majority of people are incapable of making educating enough decisions on what not to run on their computers/phones. Frankly, the less control they have, the easier it is on the rest of us (not many people ask me why their iPhone is running slow or how to get a certain configuration of apps to work).

    118. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 0

      yes, it is avail through various distros. Re-read what I wrote though. Dual screen, plus VMs. That wasn't part of the default config last I checked; the nvidia driver (meaning, the one from nvidia...) wouldn't work if you were using the VM kernels. Caveat being that it was fedora and RHEL I was using at the time. Whether that particular problem still exists is irrelevant; it is well documented that it used to exist, and thus still proves the point. If you require, I can come up with a few thousand other examples of how changing from the standard configuration can cause problems during a later update. The concept is quite simple however, and should be understood even if I didn't give a single example at at all.

    119. Re:And then what? by DECS · · Score: 1

      Seriously, "duplicating core functionality" is not the only restriction in the iPhone SDK.

      This is quite obviously related to the restriction on exposing an executable shell and other forms of executing arbitrary code, such as external plugins or frameworks. iPhone apps can't run random code downloaded from the Internet or run other files on the system. They are all sandboxed to prevent PC-style chaos.

      "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)."

      That same restriction is what kills any prospects for implementing Flash, Silverlight or Java on the iPhone.

      Apple approves Commodore 64 emulator for iPhone

    120. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah because Apples pro-unlock stance is so much metter, and touchscreens are a proven method of reliable input. At least with the G1 you get buttons and touchscreen if your ball stops working.

    121. Re:And then what? by mgblst · · Score: 1

      You can jailbreak an iPhone, and they become exactly that you want. If you want to open a nintendo, you still need one of those star shaped screw drivers.

    122. Re:And then what? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      and I can "rewire" my iPhone if I wanted, like I stated. It can be easily unlocked, and doesn't have the same "brick" risk as it initially did.

      The difference is that no car manufacturer has an explicit policy against you re-wiring your car, nor do they actively design their cars to prevent such re-wiring. Apple does.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    123. Re:And then what? by mgblst · · Score: 1

      You know you can give away free applications, where Apple makes $0, but provides all the same tools, hosting, marketing.

    124. Re:And then what? by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      I once convinced our former receptionist that God was talking to her through her computer by turning on the Windows messaging service on her computer. Result: hilarity.

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

    125. Re:And then what? by danomac · · Score: 1

      Ah, the memories... I think I was ten when we got the TRS-80. Anyone remember Dungeons of Daggorath? That one even got my mother and her boyfriend addicted.

    126. Re:And then what? by labnet · · Score: 1

      BTW, you can do a whole lot from a c64 shell when you're clever.. You're obviously too young to know.

      Watchit buddy. If you Peek at my iPhone code, I'll Poke you in the eye!

      --
      46137
    127. Re:And then what? by lennier · · Score: 1

      "I think they fear waking up to the news that a wide-spread vulnerability affected n million iPhone users."

      And an "interpreted language" is magically vulnerable to exploits while a hard-coded app isn't.... why, exactly?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    128. Re:And then what? by lennier · · Score: 1

      Into your 64K of simulated VM RAM and simulated C64 chipset... which gets you precisely what in the real iPhone?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    129. Re:And then what? by babyrat · · Score: 1

      According to the second article:

      Apple's logic was that this tool could allow users to run illegal copies of games, holding it open to a charge of contributory copyright infringement. Anything that might do so is verboten under the terms of the iPhone OS SDK.

    130. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You're thinking of Malbolge. BrainFuck is just designed to be really simple. If you want to get really simple, there are some 2/3 instruction variants (not sure which ones), and even those aren't that difficult to program for.

    131. Re:And then what? by lennier · · Score: 1

      "Because the iPhone isn't intended to be an all-purpose pocket computer - its a phone and music player. "

      That's pretty dumb, if that's all they think it is. Even dumber if users are happy with that state of affairs. Pretty sad for humanity in general, though. See Zitttrain.

      "If Apple allowed apps that ran arbitrary code they'd have to check not just the C64 emu but every app with a macro or scripting facility to ensure that they were adequately sandboxed. That would be a lot of work. "

      That... does not logically follow. At all.

      An interpreter is not 'arbitrary code' by any stretch of the imagination. It's not running arbitrary *machine code*.

      And yes, every app with a macro or scripting facility that runs on any computer, anywhere, MUST be adequately sandboxed. And not by humans, but by security policy. That's what a sandboxing model is FOR, so that you don't have to do "a lot of work" to make things secure.

      How hard is it to write some secure http://apple.slashdot.org/story/09/09/08/1714205/Apple-Pulls-C64-Emulator-From-the-App-Store?art_pos=5#APIs for "allocate memory", "output to screen", "input from keyboard", and make sure THOSE don't have bugs - and then let a program do what the heck it wants with only those APIs?

      Java managed to do this. What's so hard about the concept for Apple?

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    132. Re:And then what? by lennier · · Score: 1

      Hmm, where that link came from I don't know.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    133. Re:And then what? by citylivin · · Score: 1

      "but seriously.. if you're a Linux user, complaining about having to use obscure hacks is the ultimate in pot-kettle diametrical thinking."

      What "obscure hacks" do i need to do to install linux on any x86 computer that I have purchased?

      Why should I have to hack my phone, void my warranty and forgo security and related updates from my vendor because I want to run; Pirated games? Nope. Pirated Apple software? NOPE! software that I wrote at home and simply does not carry the "apple gods seal of approval".. YES!

      And isn't jailbreaking dependent on someone coming up with a new method with every new release? Someone else, it should be noted, is not me. So I am waiting on some 3rd party, out of my control. The whole phones mentality is "out of my control".. its sick.
      It is the worst kind of DRM, default deny unless apple approves.

      But its no skin of my back. In less than a year, motorola and all the other manufacturers will put out phones that do everything an iphone does, without all the appleGayTaint(tm). Early adopting has never been for me. All these compromises just to use *MY* hardware that i payed what, 400$ for? fuck that dude!

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    134. Re:And then what? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "I think they fear waking up to the news that a wide-spread vulnerability affected n million iPhone users."

      And an "interpreted language" is magically vulnerable to exploits while a hard-coded app isn't.... why, exactly?

      Apple is in control of the hard-coded apps.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    135. Re:And then what? by markdavis · · Score: 1

      So it sounds like you are in the market for a Palm Pre Linux phone or an Android Linux phone or a Nokia 900 Linux phone...

      The age of Linux dominated phones seems just around the corner.

    136. Re:And then what? by moon3 · · Score: 1

      POKE 20453, 255


      Causes lighting storms over Cupertino.

    137. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This summarizes why I don't own an iPhone. They're very slick and all, but I've been spoiled by running Linux for years. The concept of needing someone's approval to run software on my hardware is a non-starter for me. I'll decide that for myself, thanks very much.

      Well, I mostly agree with you, except that I'd probably still buy an iPhone if it was a lot cheaper, and I do want an iPod Touch. Basically, it comes down to whether the device is still worth it after you completely discount the App Store, which has precisely that fatal flaw. In my opinion, well, the combined web browsing + good music player justify the product.

    138. Re:And then what? by Froboz23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honestly I think the vast 99.8 % majority of folks could really care less about a C64 emulator on an iPhone.

      The market seems to think otherwise. From TFA:

      "The developer is now hard at work setting up a meeting with Apple to clarify matters and get C64 back to the retro gaming public who put the app in the top 20 paid games list across most territories inside of two days, and even made it into the top 10 in certain areas before disappearing."

      You'd be hard pressed to show me an iPhone App that's more fun than M.U.L.E.

      --
      Take off every Sig. For great justice.
    139. Re:And then what? by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      it probably duplicates core functionality[...]turns it into a "computer" that people can then "use" to "get stuff done"

      I don't get it... where's the duplicated functionality in that? ;)

    140. Re:And then what? by fabs64 · · Score: 1

      tbh I've never used the trackball on my G1. Always seemed superfluous when coupled with a responsive capacitive screen.

    141. Re:And then what? by nolife · · Score: 1

      Apple's fear is that people will install buggy apps that screw up the phone, and then blame Apple. No conspiracy needed.

      MaBell used the same arguement as well with non MaBell phones and services and even had the federal government believing it for decades. It did not reflect reality then and it doesn't now.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    142. Re:And then what? by Timex · · Score: 1

      I used to edit AUTOEXEC.BAT to read (or start off with):
      @echo "g=ffff:0" | debug
      The fun was in watching the poor sod who had to figure out why the system would keep rebooting when it was almost done booting up.

      --
      When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
    143. Re:And then what? by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      S60 r5 has a lot of the same functionality as the iPhone these days - and guess what - I can run any app I like on it including C64 emulators. Yeah the n97 is kinda expensive (599$) but 32 gigs, expandable to another 48 gigs, user serviceable battery, and freedom to use the device on ANY network I have a sim card for, and run any app I want is really quite cool.

      Oh and Symbian has always had copy/paste ;).

    144. Re:And then what? by wolenczak · · Score: 1

      With C64 basic you can write your own CocaCola pitching AI form

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzxHDqUz8Sk

    145. Re:And then what? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      That's a rather ironic selection of signature-link for this post don't you think?

      Anyway, I don't agree that it's just about "preventing PC-style chaos". Apple makes a mint from us iPhone developers, and I hardly imagine they want their revenue stream annihilated by a bunch of "run anything" code interpreters.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    146. Re:And then what? by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, he's quite right. He said that a vast 99.8% of folks could care less - which is pretty damn obvious from the sales.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    147. Re:And then what? by Rhapsody+Scarlet · · Score: 1

      Considering that this is the 21st century, I'm guessing that /dev/Sda would have been a lot more useful :-)

      Additionally, the GNU version of rm treats root as special, so "rm -rf --no-preserve-root /" would actually be necessary on most Linux systems, otherwise I believe it would just output a message saying something along the lines of "root cannot be removed" (I'm not going to find the exact message by actually trying this command myself, for obvious reasons).

    148. Re:And then what? by Brain+Damaged+Bogan · · Score: 1

      mine controls my thoughts 80% of the time, it's fair enough to say that my penis is more sentient than I am.

      --
      -- Sex is the antonym of pringles. Once you pop it's time to stop.
    149. Re:And then what? by adminstring · · Score: 1

      I agree with your point, but not with your analogy.

      Auto manufacturers do have explicit policies against you re-wiring your car. Doing so will certainly void your warranty. Also, many auto manufacturers actively design their cars specifically to prevent modification and repair by unauthorized persons. You may be able to change the oil in your expensive European luxury car, but if you want the light on the dashboard that says it's time for an oil change to go out, you'll need to either visit the dealer, or reverse-engineer the computer the dealer uses to reset those lights. In addition, the various computers in the car communicate using proprietary protocols, so if you want to integrate a computer of your own into your car, you'll have to reverse-engineer those protocols.

      It sucks when auto manufacturers do it, it sucks when printer manufacturers do it, and it sucks when Apple does it. One of the things I look for in a car is a healthy aftermarket and a knowledgeable community of owners who work on their own cars. I don't want to have to take my car to the dealer for a problem I could solve myself, and likewise I don't want to have to ask Steve Jobs' permission to run a little app on my phone. I want my stuff to be my stuff, and if the manufacturer wants to lock me out of my own stuff, then I'll find another manufacturer to give my money to.

      --
      My truck is like a series of tubes.
    150. Re:And then what? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      And the moment someone manages to do it, Apple will probably change their mind and pull the BrainF*ck interpreter off the appstore.

    151. Re:And then what? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Damn. NTVDM is actually resilient against that. Sure, it halts the VDM, but Windows doesn't go down with it.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    152. Re:And then what? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      By this logic, IM apps should be banned, because one of your friends might paste a copyrighted quote.

      Skype should be banned, since a friend on the phone may have some copyrighted music playing in the background.

      The ability to play AAC files and MP3s should be removed, because you may have downloaded pirated music to your iTunes. (Far more likely, and a risk that Apple is far more aware of, and thus far more susceptible to being charged with willful contributory infringement over)

      The list goes on...

    153. Re:And then what? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You'd only have access to the application bundle and containing folder. It's CHROOT jailed.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    154. Re:And then what? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Auto manufacturers do have explicit policies against you re-wiring your car.

      No, they really don't. And part of the reason they don't is because of a law called the magnuson-moss warranty act - which in practice says that if your car breaks, they can't deny warranty just because you've got an unapproved modification unless they can show that the modification itself is the cause of the failure.

      Also, many auto manufacturers actively design their cars specifically to prevent modification and repair by unauthorized persons. You may be able to change the oil in your expensive European luxury car, but if you want the light on the dashboard that says it's time for an oil change to go out, you'll need to either visit the dealer, or reverse-engineer the computer the dealer uses to reset those lights

      Failing to publish documentation is not the same as actively stopping modifications - they don't require digital signatures for what runs on the engine management computer nor do they release new software versions that deliberately block previously reverse-engineered protocols for talking to the car's computer.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    155. Re:And then what? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      No it doesn't, not if you use -f, anyways.

      Take a look at the man page for rm:

      --no-preserve-root do not treat â/â(TM) specially (the default)
      --preserve-root fail to operate recursively on â/â(TM)

      So (it doesn't make much sense), to protect against accidentally rm -rf'ing /, you have to remember to include the --preserve-root option.

    156. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      Not really. Keep in mind I didn't propose that analogy here, though I do understand that no analogy is perfect. So that said, while it used to be fairly encouraged to replace your radio (car manufacturers went to standardized forms for the slot, etc), that has changed quite dramatically in recent years; I'd be hard-pressed to get any radio to fit in the dash of my wife's 2009 car, even if the wiring and technical functionality would be quite simple. But radios aside, many other changes to a car will very quickly void the warranty (bore out the cylinders and see if the dealer will still warranty-repair a cracked block!) and also have established case history of limiting the liability of the manufacturer...since you changed the configuration. As things become slicker and sleeker, with more tech crammed in to each square inch, things become harder to do.

      But let us not stop there, let's go further - for the iPhone, there does indeed exist an app developer's kit which, as it so happens, will unlock your phone. That kit is available directly from Apple themselves. The process for getting that kit is less stringent - less restricted - than the process for getting an official repair manual for a new car. Think about what I just said - if your car is so much more of an open platform, why does the manufacturer refuse to give you a developer's kit (repair manual) while from Apple, you can get that developer's kit relatively easily?

      Your car is tested for safety and performance with a certain configuration, and changing much more than just the radio (and these days, even the radio for most cars) is strongly discouraged - no less so than Apple discourages iPhone unlocking by non-devs.

      More concisely, tweeking your car's computer to get more performance will void the warranty; tweeking the iPhone to get more performance will not. Car manufacturers greatly restrict repair manuals and tools necessary for making changes to your car - some manufacturers don't even supply complete info to non-brand repair shops at all, recently. Apple provides an iPhone developers kit that anyone can download, for free.

      Or even simpler - people are screaming because they heard it was cool to scream, and don't realize there's nothing all that crazy going on. You want to throw apps on your iPhone because it is a great platform - that is a strength, not a weakness. And, as it so happens, you *can*. Just unlock it.

      Unless, of course, you'd rather merely complain.

    157. Re:And then what? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      But you have to pay them $100 to do it.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    158. Re:And then what? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      No... but it might pass the iTuring test.

    159. Re:And then what? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      However, I doubt that the emulator gives you access to any of the iPhone's facilities. So it's not like you can write a program to call someone, utilize the network, or perform other privacy-compromising activities.

      What you can do is pretty limited and (one would think) innocuous....

      No matter how evil you want to get, without a security bug of some sort in the emulation layer and in the iPhone OS itself, you aren't getting far.

    160. Re:And then what? by martinw89 · · Score: 1

      Do you have a working version anymore? I'd love to try it out.

    161. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      Ever try to actually apply that act yourself?

      As a person who just a couple months ago finally won a very simple, obvious breach of warranty lawsuit in regards to a vehicle that was not functioning properly the day I took it new off the dealer floor, I can tell you...they can make claims to anything and cause all sorts of heartaches that people generally just give up on.

      Also - failing to publish documentation is a much, much weaker position for the automotive industry than the position of Apple on the iPhone; they make freely available a SDK for the iPhone. Further, you can brick your phone and still get it warranty-fixed or replaced.

      The analogy breaks down when you start talking about digital signatures for cars; unless, of course, you allow for the most obvious comparison. That would be, of course - do you think your car manufacturer would still warranty your car if you put diesel in a tank when the cap states super-unleaded only? And if you don't allow for that comparison within the analogy, you have to strike it from the comparison all together, since it is not something for which there is a comparison. Which means you're left with comparing the lack of repair manuals and special tools (many have special keyed tools that are necessary, and only available to branded repair shops) to the completely free and easily obtainable SDK for the iPhone. And in that comparison, the iPhone is by far the more open platform - not the other way around.

    162. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      One of the things I look for in a car is a healthy aftermarket and a knowledgeable community of owners who work on their own cars.

      Which is precisely why I stopped screwing around with metrics, and got a Harley ;)

      And note that I'm not advocating the DRM - I'm advocating an Open Society that is created by people choosing to create things that they then give to the society at large free of hindrance. It should be an activity the creator of stuff (whatever the stuff) should be driving force behind however, not those who want to take someone else's thing and do whatever they want with it. That activity isn't Open Society - it's simple coveting. We are not in a situation where we must take basic rights for ourselves by force - and thus, do not have the ethical backing of suggesting that that any means necessary are righteous.

      Especially since it's easy to unlock an iPhone, and there really aren't any serious drawbacks to doing it. Worst one anyone can come up with is that it might cause problems with future updates. So, don't update. Tada!

    163. Re:And then what? by DECS · · Score: 1

      I posted a link to that story because it fills in additional details about the original approval of C64.

      You are certainly right that Apple doesn't want iPhone apps or components being sold outside the App Store. The obvious reason is so that it can take a 30% cut of all software being sold for its platform (just like game console makers do, although their cut is much larger). But the linked article also points out other reasons why Apple is working to maintain control over the iPhone's apps.

      For starters, it means that malware for the iPhone will be really hard to create and viruses will be even harder. If an app goes berserk, Apple can revoke its certificate to stop it dead. It also prevents shovelware from making the iPhone software market look like a dump. Go browse a WiMo or Symbian store. Most of their apps look as bad as DOS-era software. Apple is pretty strict about not just looks, but style, preventing nagware and begging. Apple even canned an entire developer of shovelware, banning something like 800 garbage apps from the App Store because many of them were appropriating unauthorized data, just like SEO trashmen who steal content and put up fake blogs paid for by Google.

      Google thinks there is no trash beneath their ads, which is why it naively opens its arms to developers in Android. I claimed some time ago this would be a problem for Android (once it gets going), and I still think I'll be right. Nobody is agreeing yet.

      Google's Android Market Guarantees Problems for Users

      Apple also doesn't want to allow Flash/Silverlight/Java to take over its mobile platform and compete against Cocoa on the iPhone. This is more controversial, but is related to the "we don't want your insecure junkware tainting our platform" motivation. Most of the vulnerabilities reported for Mac OS X are actually flaws in Flash and Java. Apple doesn't want to maintain the same effort on the iPhone, and currently it doesn't have to.

      In June 2007, I was the first to say Apple clearly didn't want Flash or Java on the iPhone, at a time when everyone was assuring us that Adobe would deliver Flash for the iPhone by the end of 2007. They were wrong. Apple clearly does not want Flash, and was only telling pundits just enough to keep them pacified.

      Gone in a Flash: More on Apple's iPhone Web Plans

      In this case, Apple isn't worried about C64 creating a BASIC platform that rivals Cocoa. Instead, it's mostly worried that an exposed BASIC interpreter could be used to distribute unauthorized "ROMs," potentially exposing Apple to copyright claims, or to open some can of worms about viruses or "malware" that might be used to suggest the iPhone had security problems. You know Wired would jizz itself over C64 BASIC malware running on the iPhone, using headlines that again equated it to Windows 95, as it did at the iPhone's launch.

      Kim Zetter and the iPhone Root Security Myth

      When you judge Apple, don't forget that the company swims in a tank of piranhas.

    164. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can run programs that come not from the app store, but from any web server that chooses to host a few Commodore Apps. Admittedly what the emulator can do as far as accessing bits of the iPhone is probably very limited (although enough PEEKs and POKEs might allow sneaking into things) but if anyone finds a way of getting the emulator to get data from a web feed... you can do all kinds of things. (Of course in that case, you may as well just sell access to the web page and tell them to access it through Safari.)

      Also, Apple is selling an ideal, the "shiny, polished, you don't have to do it yourself, everything just works" ideal. NOTHING will burst that bubble faster than their first introduction to programming. Some will fall in love and dive in. Many others will be ticked that it does what they ask, not what they want, or blame Apple for allowing a faulty product when the only problem is their inability to learn the language and/or articulate what they want to do. If you can thing through what you're doing, you can program anything. (With a capable language and manuals.) Apple is all about not having to think.

      Also, Apple wants people buying their products to feel superior. It makes you hip or cool. You're not so hip or cool if you can't even write in BASIC.

    165. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      I strongly doubt you actually built your own radio - anyone with sufficient ability to do so would also realize that such a task would very quickly be not remotely worth the effort. See Leonard Read's I, Pencil for the classic case regarding that.

      And more apropos, few could claim to have contributed as much to OSS, and to understand it as deeply, as Linus Torvalds. And yet, even he - though obviously quite capable - prefers distros that make things simple and do most of the things for him.

      Install your own radio? Sure, simple enough. Take an LCD, a circuit board, and a bunch of circuit components and create a useful and functional radio? Man, why the hell would you? Would be fun, yeah - but fun for something sitting on your desk. For something that is in your car and that you actually want to take cds, give them back when you want (and without scratches), handles the special nature of dual-signal FM to create stereo, etc? To do that by yourself, the best-case scenario would put you exponentially higher in cost for the same features. Worst case, same exponential cost - with fewer features.

      Did I mention no one is stopping you from unlocking your iPhone?

    166. Re:And then what? by catmistake · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On jailbroken iPhones this emu is hackable. So far I've only been able to get Impossible Mission working fully, but Ghostbusters, Castle Wolfenstein, and a few others I threw in to the games directory in the app bundle load and are functional and nearly playable. A little more time and I'll have them working, too.

    167. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh good times.... to be 7 years old again in Kmart....The Atari XLs used to have Peeks and Pokes that would disable the break key. So the sales rep had no choice but to restart the computer to get rid of the endless loops of text....wow we were such rebels as kids.

    168. Re:And then what? by foxylad · · Score: 1

      > People have tipping points they may not even recognize, at some point
      > they will say "enough is enough" and take a stand against the authority
      > figure they see as unnecessarily restricting some free choices.

      My brother was the ultimate Apple fanboi, and he's just bought an HTC Hero (android). The control-freakery was a major factor.

      --
      Do as you would be done to.
    169. Re:And then what? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      There probably isn't a whole lot to stop people from writing a Java to BrainFuck compiler, and then using the generated code to feed into the iPhone.

      It's much easier to write a Java to Objective-C compiler.

    170. Re:And then what? by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

      ]God help us
      God is not currently logged on.
      ]

    171. Re:And then what? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      They banned it because it's an interpreter, meaning it gives people a little too much control over the software and potentially the hardware on the phone. You may not like it, but if you bought it, you signed the contract, you have no excuses. I think the only folks who get all worked up about this are the Linux crowd wanting everything to be 'free' and 'open' without understanding that it is designed to be a closed system and it's vastly successful. Apple has no reason to open source their phone.

      I'm very much not from the Linux crowd (a brief glance at my /. comment history will testify to that), and yet I think it's brain-dead.

      First of all, this has nothing to do with "open sourcing" the phone. No-one is asking for that (well, RMS does, I guess, but he does that for everything). What we want is open platform. You know, kinda like pretty much every other desktop and mobile OS on the market. Heck, Windows Mobile is open in that sense! Surely if Microsoft can do that...

      Now as to your reason. Being able to write one's own applications is "giving people a little too much control" - WTF? Did you just read "The Right to Read", and thought it's a brilliant idea? And how can I possibly have "too much control" over the device that I own?

      Hardware argument is pure bullshit; unless the interpreter is specifically written to control it, there's no magic dust in it that would give the user this ability. Furthermore, any user who'd want it can just get iPhone SDK, and write an Objective-C program doing the same - and no interpreter (written in that very same Objective-C) will be able to do more. Yet somehow we don't see cell towers blowing up, or anything like that. Kinda comes as a surprise - what with Symbian and WinMo being out there for ages, with full development toolchains available to everyone for download, and no restrictions on software installation, who'd imagine it would work out like that, huh?

    172. Re:And then what? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      Yeah because Apples pro-unlock stance is so much metter, and touchscreens are a proven method of reliable input. At least with the G1 you get buttons and touchscreen if your ball stops working.

      No, but if it's on AT&T then I don't really need to migrate it to another network (which I would need to do w/ a G1).

      AT&T by me is quite good, but T-Mobile is horrid.

      If there was a good AT&T Google-based phone at the time I needed one I would've probaby gone with that.

    173. Re:And then what? by NiceGeek · · Score: 1

      "You'd be hard pressed to show me an iPhone App that's more fun than M.U.L.E."

      Pity that M.U.L.E. wasn't part of the package, and since it's likely still owned my Electronic Arts, won't ever see a release on the C64 emulator.

    174. Re:And then what? by biovoid · · Score: 1

      There is an approved SID player for the iPhone. It downloads and plays any tune from the High Voltage SID Collection.

    175. Re:And then what? by dgbrownnt · · Score: 1

      Hehe, that's funny. I'm 29 and I was programming a C64 by the time I was 7. But I'm also really really weird, so it all balances out.

    176. Re:And then what? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Given Apple's (misguided) obsession with security it has to be this way - otherwise someone could create a diskimage that exploits a buffer overflow in the emulator to run native code and thus jailbreak the phone.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    177. Re:And then what? by ajegwu · · Score: 1

      Pretty much anything. Lunix existed before JeffK!!. http://lng.sourceforge.net/

    178. Re:And then what? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      All of ye seem to miss the point -

      - The BASIC inside the C64 is copyrighted by Microsoft, and Apple doesn't want to incur the wrath of the sleeping dragon, so they've decided that functionality must be disabled.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    179. Re:And then what? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Apple's fear is that people will install buggy apps that screw up the phone, and then blame Apple.

      Nope. Apple's fear is that casual users will be able to obtain and install apps without going through App Store (and, consequently, giving Apple part of their money) without going through warranty-voiding procedures such as jailbreaking.

      But you're right, there's no conspiracy needed. It's so damn obvious.

    180. Re:And then what? by Zero_DgZ · · Score: 1

      Not for an original NES you don't. Grab a #1 Philips head and hack away. People can, and do. Ripping out the lockout chip leaps to mind as a good first improvement, followed by cleaning and re-bending all the pins on the cartridge connector. As a sidenote, disabling the lockout chip would theoretically enable you to run arbitrary, unlicensed games on the system. (How we go full circle!) That'd be more useful if there were any unlicensed software other than Bible Adventures.

      Got an PROM burner?

    181. Re:And then what? by TheBeowulf · · Score: 1

      Is it now... And here I thought it was that lump three feet above your @$$... (/me is booted from the game)

    182. Re:And then what? by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      Security? No, they want control. There's a difference. Apple has always had control over their platforms. The iPhone is just an attempt to provide more functionality for less work, while maintaining the same control they've had over their other platforms.

      Apple's paranoia plus the paranoia that a telecom operator has for equipment used on their network...a potent mix!

      I have an iPod Touch. It's a wonderful gadget, and I can have some real fun with it jailbroken!

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    183. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You won't have even voided the warranty on it.

      You should double check that.

    184. Re:And then what? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Security? No, they want control. There's a difference. Apple has always had control over their platforms. The iPhone is just an attempt to provide more functionality for less work, while maintaining the same control they've had over their other platforms.

      Well yeah, there is that. Of course this way they get paid when you install the Roms too, not just the emulator.

      I have an iPod Touch. It's a wonderful gadget, and I can have some real fun with it jailbroken!

      I dunno. I've got a iPod touch and Sony Ericsson X1. I much prefer the MP3 player on my X1. Then again if I didn't I could choose from a lot of alternatives. And if wanted an emulator there are loads for WinMo. Of course the UI is not as polished as Apple. Still even that is replaceable.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    185. Re:And then what? by adolf · · Score: 1

      No, they really don't.

      Yes, some really do. My (US model) 1995 BMW 325i has a rather wordy sticker in the upper-left corner of the windshield proclaiming that aftermarket electronics (including, specifically, hand-held cellular telephones) should not be used in nor powered by nor connected to that particular car, lest it jeopardize the BMW Limited Warranty.

      The mere facts that the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act exists, is generally a good law for consumers, and is fairly easily enforceable, does not preclude manufacturers from either creating contrary policies or outright violating it.

      (I, of course, have hacked the shit out of that car, scary-looking warning label be damned.)

    186. Re:And then what? by adolf · · Score: 1

      Oh. And since that probably counts as a fancy European luxury car: It's no big deal to reset the oil change indicator. The idiot's procedure is thus:

      Short a pin (pin 7, IIRC) on the underhood diagnostic connector to a nearby ground. Turn key to on. Have assistant tell you when the dashboard indicator has reset (several seconds). Remove ground.

      Done!

      Sure, it's not a simple push-button, but I guess I don't really mind: I grok /etc just fine, too.

    187. Re:And then what? by furbearntrout · · Score: 1
      it wasn't at first, but times have changed

      LAME started life as a GPL'd patch against the dist10 ISO demonstration source, and thus was incapable of producing an mp3 stream or even being compiled by itself. But in May 2000, the last remnants of the ISO source code were replaced, and now LAME is the source code for a fully LGPL'd MP3 encoder...

      --
      Crap. What did the new CSS do with the "Post anonymously" option??
    188. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Along the same lines - I've been considering making a "HollywoodOS" distro (or application bundle) that does every cliché hollywood computer thing. For example, it could have an image viewer with "enhance" (which would just insert/generate a random image from a directory of number plates, faces, etc into the reflection of the glasses of the man 200m from the security camera's 320x200 greyscale blocktacular frame), or an audio "analysis program" which works essentially the same way. And of course, the obligatory "rapid-fire blip" that every computer makes whenever the screen refreshes or the hard drive seeks, and the ever-present "cascading pop-up of shell windows" whenever something particularly clever is done, and the large green "ACCESS GRANTED!!" during every successful login. Anyone less lazy than I is free to implement this ;)

    189. Re:And then what? by Zoozie · · Score: 1

      Since it is possible to write code, you can write some 'smart' code. Since the code is 'smart' it will start write more code for itself, which is possible since you can write code. And suddenly BOOM - You have IPhone Skynets all the world! I told you so...

    190. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I speak for everyone here when I say that you're a dick.

    191. Re:And then what? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Why is it dumb to have a design philosophy? Or should all computers only be suited to nerds?

    192. Re:And then what? by ConfusedVorlon · · Score: 1

      They rejected my app (Fast Web) multiple times because they thought I was using my own Javascript interpreter.

      It took about 4 attempts over several months to convince them that I was only using a 100% standard UIWebView

    193. Re:And then what? by Douglas+Goodall · · Score: 1

      Apple does not allow interpretive languages to be loaded as applications because if you could do that, you could have apps they don't get to approve. As soon as their was a basic interpreter available, users could write and load their programs without a signing certificate, even within the limited sandbox of the C64 emulation.

    194. Re:And then what? by Nekomusume · · Score: 1

      M.U.L.E. is more fun that most games made in the last 20 years.

    195. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, if I sell it for 0$, I get money and apple doesn't?

    196. Re:And then what? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      The emulator author had already obtained permission to distribute the ROM so that isn't the reason.

    197. Re:And then what? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      This is the same apple that you can still find the occasional "Rip, Mix, Burn" advert for - the first is illegal in this country, the third probably so.

    198. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geek stuff.

      Which of course Apple doesn't want, they want the iPhone to be the phone of teenagers and managers to show off, another kind of jewelry.

    199. Re:And then what? by sad_ · · Score: 1

      you did that too?! haha, i wonder if there was anybody who didn't pull off this joke back in the day (i blame wargames as an inspiration to make that hoax).

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    200. Re:And then what? by BlackBloq · · Score: 0

      To know you have a COMPUTER That is locked out... Like the Xbox 360 not being able to run windows is a joke.

    201. Re:And then what? by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      He had the permission to distribute the emulator *without* Microsoft's BASIC.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    202. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think so. I think the real problem is they want to keep the platform closed, so they can continue to give guarantees to content providers that their products are not being copied off a "hacked" device. I have an Android phone, and since it's open, it is not as well supported among proprietary content providers.

      Think of the BASIC access as a hole, a security exploit. I think once Apple closes it, the emulator will be back. (Given that they are motivated to close it in some way other than banning the whole app.)

    203. Re:And then what? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure, the last time I played with it was probably ten or fifteen years ago, back in the day of the five inch floppy. I may have it on a hard drive somewhere. I should port it to javascript and put it on the net if I find a copy or the source.

      The premise is simple (it had to be to run on a 16k computer). The way it worked was it looked for certain keywords and went from there. The main keywords were who, what, when, where, how, and why. It also looked for vulgarities so if you cursed at it it would curse back or give a smartassed answer like "do you talk like that in front of your mother?" or "fuck you too, asshole". There were a few other triggers, iirc.

      It had close to a thousand different answers, which were randomly selected from the groups of answers it hit by keyword. It actually worked a lot better than I thought it would. Of course, having funny answers made it a lot more fun. My whole purpose in writing it was to illustrate that you can fool people into believing a machine can think, but it backfired -- people actually believed it did think rather than realising that they were fooled. I'd tell them it was a trick, and they didn't believe me.

    204. Re:And then what? by Darth+Snowshoe · · Score: 1

      Well it's incumbent on the programmer for the emulator to enforce that limit, is it not? How would Apple verify that? Maybe I'm being naive here.

    205. Re:And then what? by Chonnawonga · · Score: 1

      I don't go burning down butcher shops because I'm vegetarian.

      No, but you don't patronize them, either.

    206. Re:And then what? by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Not much Apple are just cunts.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    207. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LAME? MP3 encoding on a C64? Cool!

      I'm pretty sure LAME ain't an mp3 encoder, so no...

    208. Re:And then what? by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Seriously? What? What can you do from a C64 shell on an iPhone?

      Wasn't there some sort of kiler poke or HCF thing on the C64 ? (ok, I used an APPLE2 at the time, back when they actually made fun computers)
      Or maybe they're afraid you'd see all the "(C)Microsoft" strings if you PEEKed long enough...

      You have no idea of the mischief those BASIC hackers can do. Why do you think there isn't a BASIC shell any more ?

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    209. Re:And then what? by manicbutt · · Score: 1

      You could load disk images of games you which didn't buy or otherwise have a license to play. That would open Apple to liabilities and lawsuits, and we wouldn't want that, would we?

    210. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think it's OK to Apple to block interpreters, then you are clearly on the wrong side of the fence. You should not be on Slashdot.

      Regardless of any license agreement, the first sale doctrine applies. If I own an object I have the right to do anything I want with it. Apple's licensing schemes to prevent this have not been tested in a court of law, and it's probably illegal. It is also probably illegal to artificially prevent software from running on any hardware platform. I say "probably" because IBM pulled that stunt on their mainframes, but when sued they settled out of court and stopped the practice.

      The truth of the matter is that this is an anti-competitive action on the part of Apple. Unfortunately, Apple currently holds only about a 10% market share in smart phone sales, so they can't get nailed for it yet. In short, they are dickwads. The greater public just hasn't gotten clued into that fact yet.

    211. Re:And then what? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      I note that the description very carefully describes it as a game, not as a programming language. The wage slave that reviewed it probably didn't even notice that it was a language masquerading as a game.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    212. Re:And then what? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Heh. I've done that too. My "shell" allowed changing drives, changing directories, and had canned responses to some of the more common DOS commands (e.g. DIR, CLS, WIN - this was back in the days of Win 3.1, IIRC...). I can't remember whether or not I made it access the drives or directories to see if they were valid before letting you CD them... :)

      Now I want to dig the program up and see if I still have it, just to refresh my memory on what all it did...

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    213. Re:And then what? by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      It's an emulator. Get DOSBox, put a copy of BASIC on it, and try to write a program that will PEEK and POKE and crash your OS. (And no, you can't do something absurdly stupid like mounting the system32 folder inside DOSBox.)

      At the worst, you'll crash DOSBox.

      Now explain to me why it should be possible with a C64 emulator.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    214. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Death panels! Socialism! WHARGARBL!

    215. Re:And then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ALF doesn't actually help animals (again, harms additional animals instead)

      Well, duh. Everyone knows that ALF likes eating cats!

    216. Re:And then what? by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      You joke (and re-post) but really, I believe that imitation is a great way to learn programming. By trying to re-create all the computer screens from TV and movies, I pushed myself to learn new programming techniques. Sure, it was all AppleBASIC, but at least I came out of it knowing a lot about programming concepts that could be applied elsewhere.

      You need to have a motivation to write a program. If that motivation is "just to learn stuff", it's not very strong to keep you working at it when you hit a sticky point.

      My first AppleBASIC programs were simple things like "make a program that counts down from 9 to 0 using GR characters that fill the screen." Just like I saw all the time in shows like Dr Who. That's easy ... if you don't consider the GR stuff. I created a bitmap of the numbers 0-9, and draw that on screen as I counted down. From there, I modified the bitmap, made them narrower, so I could count from numbers as high as 99. I think I also modded the program to use green for 99-10, and red for 9-0.

      Once I did that, I moved on to other programs.

      The stuff from War Games was harder, and I learned a lot from working on it. For "Global Thermonuclear War", I drew an outline of the U.S. and U.S.S.R. in HGR mode, using x,y pairs stored in a DATA statement. Cities that you could attack were listed in an array. Drawing the missile tracks was more difficult, but mainly because I didn't know trig (I was in like, 4th grade) so drew a "triangle" track instead, with square explosions.

      Trying to create what I guessed "Biological Warware" (also from War Games) might have been like ... way harder! I settled on doing it in GR mode, drawing a map of the U.S. in white. A bio attack "site" (square of green pixels) was chosen at random within that. The attack propagated using a simple algorithm: which I learned was like Conway's Life ... except that a GR spot could "die" (red pixel) after being infected for so-many "turns", and no longer took part in the algorithm. Wow, I learned a lot from that.

      All that because I was trying to emulate what I saw in movies and on TV.

      Somewhere after that, I just experimented. I wrote a text-based adventure game, with 1-letter commands (N, S, E, W, ... A(ttack), R(un away!), etc.) One thing I played with, but didn't realize it's significance until college, was a simple HGR program that drew a dot in the middle of the screen, at the very left edge. I then walked across the screen, moving the line up if RND(1)<0.3, down if RND(1)>0.6, and stayed level otherwise. I called it a "stock market ticker". Imagine my surprise at university when I realized I'd discovered/written a "random walk" simulator when I was a kid!

    217. Re:And then what? by DaVince21 · · Score: 1

      It'd just print the contents of the disk image.

      --
      I am not devoid of humor.
    218. Re:And then what? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      ...and while not patronizing them, I don't complain about the fact that their product isn't free. One would hope that people have reasons for doing the things they do. The challenge then is to be consistent and rational; disliking someone else's product on the basis that you can't do anything at you want with it without first unlocking it (wow, hard stuff) is silly - you want to have your way with it because it's a great platform. If it was a poor platform, you wouldn't want to. I don't feel some sort of sense of entitlement towards butcher shops - I don't think they are ethically bound to serve me whatever I want.

      Most people tend to miss the point I'm making; Open Society will never be successful if you whine and try to force someone else to share openly - be the change you want to see. Instead of complaining that someone else hasn't opened something, create something yourself and give it away.

    219. Re:And then what? by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      An interpreter is not 'arbitrary code' by any stretch of the imagination. It's not running arbitrary *machine code*.

      Well, C64 BASIC would allow you unfettered access to every byte of the C64 virtual machine's address space. (Aaahh, POKE...) and would certainly let you exploit any buffer overrun or DoS opportunities in the emulator.

      And yes, every app with a macro or scripting facility that runs on any computer, anywhere, MUST be adequately sandboxed.

      ...and the security policies to do that magically design, implement and test themselves for free, and never have any flaws, right? Nope - Apple are smart enough to know that you still have to test individual apps, and any sort of scripting/macro facility drives the complexity of that through the roof.

      Java managed to do this.

      And has never, ever, ever had any critical security vulnerabilities? I don't think so.

      What's so hard about the concept for Apple?

      A major design goal of Java was specifically to produce a secure, sandboxed virtual machine to allow running arbitrary code. Sun spent a penny or two achieving and maintaining that. Apple's priority with the iPhone is to deliver robust phone, iPod and organiser functionality using their own apps. The restrictions on the public API reflect this priority.

      The major failing of previous smartphones (particularly WM ones) was that although they were pretty good pocket computers, they were fscking useless as phones and organisers.

      Of course, if you want to write your own code for your iPhone you can always code in AJAX and deploy over the web... Apple jave no choice but to keep Safari well sandboxed - but that burden is shared with desktop Safari and the WebKit project (and Android!).

      Pretty sad for humanity in general, though.

      Why? If you want a general purpose computer, buy a Mac: desktop MacOS comes with a full-blown Objective C SDK as standard, plus Java, PHP, Perl, Python, Applescript, bash etc. which puts it second only to Linux/BSD in terms of programmer friendliness. If you want a programmable phone buy an Android dev kit or something.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    220. Re:And then what? by itsdapead · · Score: 1

      The final straw was the scrollball.

      As per the other poster: I hardly touch the trackball on my HTC Hero.

      Only serious criticisms are that the current Android UI lacks the responsiveness of the iPhone, the screen is noticably cramped c.f. the iPhone and the lack of support for proxy servers over wifi (yup, if your workplace has a firewall, hope that there's a good 3G signal there, 'cos you won't be using WiFi).

      I'd say that only the last one is a potential dealbreaker.

      On the design side, though, Apple's advantage is that they've made a clear decision that the touchscreen is the primary interface which all applications must support: Strategically, it was disasterous that the G1 had a slide-out keyboard (however much you may love it) because now you have apps that don't play nicely with on-screen keys on the Magic/Hero. The various physical keys are dumb too (again, I've found games whih are unplayable because the keys have changed place on the Hero) - Apple's strategy of everything but "home" and "power" being on the touch screen is much cleaner.

      Pity - my previous WM phone (HTC TyTn) was a glorious example of how apparently good hardware was rendered barely usable because of a "if some is good, more is better" design philosophy: It had a keyboard, soft keyboard, handwriting recoghnition, touch screen, stylus, scroll wheel, joypad, and so many other buttons that it was practically impossible to take the fracking thing out of your pocket to answer a call without pressing something, and none of the apps worked particularly well with all of the input methods... You'd think people would look and learn.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    221. Re:And then what? by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      it is not your product. You do not own the product, the IP, anything at all to do with the product. You have a "right to use," and that's it. You couldn't take it and reverse-engineer it, replicating it in your own Chinese factories. There are a *lot* of things you know you cannot legally do to it.

      You're greatly mistaken. When you buy something tangible like hardware, you DO own that product and can legally do lots of things with it, including things the manufacturer wouldn't like.

      "The Law and Economics of Reverse Engineering", by Pamela Samuelson and Suzanne Scotchmer, published in the Yale Law Journal (Vol. 111, p.1528), has this to say:

      The legal right to reverse-engineer a trade secret is so well-established that courts and commentators have rarely perceived a need to explain the rationale for this doctrine. A rare exception is the 1989 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc., which characterized reverse engineering as "an essential part of innovation," likely to yield variations on the product that "may lead to significant advances in the field." Moreover, "the competitive reality of reverse engineering may act as a spur to the inventor" to develop patentable ideas. Even when reverse engineering does not lead to additional innovation, the Bonito Boats decision suggests it may still promote consumer welfare by providing consumers with a competing product at a lower price.

      http://www.yalelawjournal.org/pdf/111-7/SamuelsonFINAL.pdf

      That's not to say that the manufacturer cannot build things into the product, or in services that it uses, that try to block this. Apple is within its rights to refuse service to jailbroken iPhones, for instance, but it's not illegal to jailbreak them.

    222. Re:And then what? by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Most newer handsets run small Java and Flash applications. Try again.

  2. Runstop / Restore by fyrie · · Score: 1

    I hope they get it sorted out, but frankly the poor quality selection of games for it has taken some of the shine off the app, especially without basic.

  3. RUN by tverbeek · · Score: 1

    10 PRINT "HELLO, WORLD!"
    20 GOTO 10



    i'm adding this text to get past the anti-caps filter

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:RUN by ArbitraryDescriptor · · Score: 5, Funny

      10 PRINT "HELLO, WORLD!"

      Banned: Duplicates text display functionality.

  4. Obligatory by _PimpDaddy7_ · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I felt a great disturbance in the Force...as if millions of
    voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear
    something terrible has happened.

    1. Re:Obligatory by Duradin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Millions might be a tad high there Obi-wan.

      There's probably a total of two people who own an iphone/touch and bought the app and actually planned on doing something with the C64 BASIC.

      Most of the people complaining probably wouldn't even think of owning anything Apple and BASIC is just something for them to make a show of why they'll never own an iPhone (and to look "cool" to all their F/OSS friends while doing so).

      OMG! They pulled an app I'd never buy from a phone I'll never own over a feature I'd never use!!! I must complain loudly and vigorously to show how hardcore linux I am!

    2. Re:Obligatory by dgbrownnt · · Score: 1

      If that is the case, I'm definitely not most people here. I have both an iPhone and a C64, and would love to be programming C64 stuff on the iPhone. It just sounds like so much fun. I was sad to see that I missed downloading it before it got pulled :( (especially after finding out there's a way to hack it to use BASIC)

      I think you're a little harsh on people here. There's a lot of nostalgia when it comes to the C64, even among those who eventually bought something that Apple made.

  5. Same thing we do every night Pinky by wiredog · · Score: 4, Funny

    Try to take over the world.

    1. Re:Same thing we do every night Pinky by infolation · · Score: 2, Funny

      by running C64 Skype

    2. Re:Same thing we do every night Pinky by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Abuse ourselves while perusing Lane Bryant catalogs? NARF!!!

      *shudders* No, try to take over the world.

      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    3. Re:Same thing we do every night Pinky by HasselhoffThePaladin · · Score: 1

      +1, Horrifying

  6. The n900 cometh... by Kirin+Fenrir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For technophiles, the iPhone is dead. The n900, with it's Debian-based-OS and open platform, is our new lord and savior. http://maemo.nokia.com/n900/

    --
    Caffeine is my anti-drug!

    Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
    1. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For technophiles, the iPhone is dead. The n900, with it's Debian-based-OS and open platform, is our new lord and savior.

      http://maemo.nokia.com/n900/

      For $650 USD, it sure as hell better be...

    2. Re:The n900 cometh... by hansamurai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or the Android platform, it's definitely getting interesting with the Sprint offering coming next month and a whole slew of phones hitting Europe and the US.

    3. Re:The n900 cometh... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unlike the iPhone though, that's the whole cost. The iPhone's "real" price is buried in the mandatory contract. Outside of the U.S., you don't have a phone bundled with the plan, but the plan itself is cheaper. So yes, it costs $650 (or equivalent local currency), but the plan only runs $20-40/month, not $60-70/month. Over two years, you will have paid quite a bit more for the iPhone. And if you choose not to upgrade after two years, the savings over the iPhone accrue even faster.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    4. Re:The n900 cometh... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Informative

      I assume you speak of the successor to my n810? ... you'll not be making any calls from it.

      I assume you can't follow a link. The N900 is indeed a phone, quad band to boot.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:The n900 cometh... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Informative

      The N810 wasn't, the N900 is.

    6. Re:The n900 cometh... by Kenja · · Score: 0, Troll

      Indeed, the new model has a phone app shoe-horned in. Only time will tell if it is any good as a phone. However I was speaking of the existing platform, which is phoneless.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    7. Re:The n900 cometh... by JustinOpinion · · Score: 3, Informative

      I assume you speak of the successor to my n810? I do enjoy having a full Linux system on my PDA, runs the apps I want etc. HOWEVER! Its is NOT a phone.

      FYI, the N900 is a smartphone (an upcoming smartphone, mind you). It is designed much like the N800/N810, and runs Maemo (and can be used as an Internet tablet), but it is also a full-featured cell-phone. More information: official site, Wikipedia, Slashdot story and follow-up.

    8. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The n900 is a phone, can make gsm calls, requires a sim chip. Even says so on the box.

    9. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I assume you speak of the successor to my n810? I do enjoy having a full Linux system on my PDA, runs the apps I want etc. HOWEVER! Its is NOT a phone. Which the iPhone is. It does couple well with other Nokia products, including cell phones, but outside of VOIP you'll not be making any calls from it.

      Read the specs: N900 is also a phone.

    10. Re:The n900 cometh... by graft · · Score: 1

      Unlike its predecessors, the N900 IS a phone.

    11. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The n900 IS a phone, though. Check the link.

    12. Re:The n900 cometh... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Informative

      the new model has a phone app shoe-horned in

      An app? Just software, no hardware? As for claiming it was shoe-horned in, how do you know - were you part of the design team?

      However I was speaking of the existing platform

      No you weren't, you used the future tense.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:The n900 cometh... by jgostling · · Score: 1

      Oh! You mean like an iPod Touch.

      Cheers!

    14. Re:The n900 cometh... by just+fiddling+around · · Score: 0

      It's been dead for a while because of all the open-source goodness of Openmoko's Freerunner, our real savior from proprietary-ness! Open hardware, software and runs Debian for ultimate freedom.

      http://openmoko.org/

      --
      You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
    15. Re:The n900 cometh... by rysiek · · Score: 5, Informative

      two words for you: "root access".

      on Android you have to bend over backwards to gain it (unless there is a fsckup with text message editor, heh); on maemo its:
      $ sudo gainroot
      #

      Android is almost as closed as iPhone...

    16. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the Android platform,

      Except that pesky N900 is an open platform. If you want android on it, just port it (which some people have already done).

    17. Re:The n900 cometh... by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Isn't the iPhone $600 if you buy it, I did hear something amusing where you sign up for a contract with ATT and then cancel it and it come out to about $450 or something but then you have to deal with ATT customer "service"

    18. Re:The n900 cometh... by tepples · · Score: 1

      Outside of the U.S., you don't have a phone bundled with the plan, but the plan itself is cheaper.

      But Slashdot and Apple are both based in the U.S., where you don't get a discount on the plan for bringing your own phone.

    19. Re:The n900 cometh... by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your post reminds me of the hundreds of "the iPod is dead, here is its successor" posts that I read back in the day.

      I'm just sayin'.

    20. Re:The n900 cometh... by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      You don't need an iphone plan if you get it prepaid and at least one place does sell the new ones 750 and 800, otoh, that's 100 more than the n900.

    21. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have root on my Android Dev Phone. What's your problem with it?

    22. Re:The n900 cometh... by SeaDuck79 · · Score: 1

      Hail to our iPhonian captors...err...I mean Debian liberators! Death to the iNfidels!

    23. Re:The n900 cometh... by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The "hidden cost" of the subsidized phone applies to EVERYONE in the US - not just those who actually receive a subsidized phone. If you're paying for the subsidy anyways, you might as well use the thing.

      That said, I'd bet the n900 will be subsidized over here too. Unfortunately it's yet another smart phone with no CDMA support. Not only is the most ubiquitous cell carrier here CDMA only, but for myself personally I'm not even within range of ANY GSM based carrier.

      I've still held out buying a Storm for now despite wanting a smart phone BADLY. I think the Motorola Android phones will be what finally gets me into the smartphone world.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    24. Re:The n900 cometh... by Microlith · · Score: 1

      In a way, if you're a big enough geek he's right.

      I was seriously considering an iPhone but the lack of a hard keyboard (and the ability to buy without a contract) put me off. But this thing has a hard keyboard and (as far as I can see) an entirely FOSS software stack, on top of giving direct access to the root account and having apt installed.

      It's beaten out every Android phone I've seen with that little fact alone.

    25. Re:The n900 cometh... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      For technophiles, the iPhone is dead. The n900, with it's Debian-based-OS and open platform, is our new lord and savior.

      http://maemo.nokia.com/n900/

      Remember folks, it's okay to tout your fanboy product if popular opinion also likes it.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    26. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Android is restricted to programming Java and doesn't allow access to the machine. It's certainly much more open than the iPhone, but unfortunately still nowhere near the n900 or similar platforms.

    27. Re:The n900 cometh... by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Doing this trick on Fido for a 16GB iPhone 3G S is 500$ (200$ for Phone, 300$ for early cancellation - add 60 and then some (it's a canadian telco after all) for the first month of contract - and then switch to prepaid (and yay no paying for voice anymore)

    28. Re:The n900 cometh... by whisper_jeff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In a way, if you're a big enough geek he's right.

      And, if you're a big enough fan of Apple's elegant UI design, he's wrong. But, if you hate Apple, he's right. But... I think you get my point.

      There will be tons of anecdotal evidence supporting or refuting his claim but the simple fact remains - it's an incredibly similar claim, with the exact same anecdotal evidence supporting and refuting, that has been made about the iPod a thousand times before. And we know how those claims played out.

      No, I'm not claiming the iPhone is untouchable. No, I'm not claiming it's perfect (I don't own one despite wanting one very much - the contract terms through Rogers (in Canada) are so unfavourable that I'd rather do without). I'm not claiming that it's the best smart phone available nor am I claiming that there aren't other smart phones that are better, for a variety of reasons. What I am claiming is that when someone says "here's the iPhone-killer", I immediately shunt virtually everything that follows into the same category as posts about iPod-killers, which is to say I ignore them.

      If people need to hype their product by claiming it's an iPhone-killer, then it probably isn't. The iPhone-killer won't need to sell itself as such - it will just come out and be more successful than the iPhone, on it's own merits.

    29. Re:The n900 cometh... by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      Is it possible to use this as a phone in the U.S.?

    30. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do love the looks of this, but why do these devices cost as much as nice laptops and twice as much as netbooks? Touchscreen might be part of it, but they are small. What other components eat up the cost?

    31. Re:The n900 cometh... by SteveAstro · · Score: 1

      ...dead easy to get root on the Android, and access some lovely work on it by enthusiasts.

      Steve

    32. Re:The n900 cometh... by Darinbob · · Score: 2, Funny

      Linux is nice and all, but does it run C64 BASIC?

    33. Re:The n900 cometh... by Kirin+Fenrir · · Score: 1

      I know replying to my own post is cheesy, but there is a great feature you guys might have missed.

      THE BATTERY IS REMOVABLE.
      (Anyone who has ever had a dying ipod/iphone battery can appreciate this)

      --
      Caffeine is my anti-drug!

      Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
    34. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Android is restricted to programming Java and Python, and Lua, and Beanshell, and Perl.

      There, fixed that for you. And that's just for starters. You can run Debian right alongside Android and you can cross compile C programs if you really want to. I have a Nokia 770 running OS2007HE and Android is light years ahead. I'm sure the N900 is great and I'm definitely interested in it but, you shouldn't short change Android so quickly.

    35. Re:The n900 cometh... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      There wasn't, and still isn't, anything better than the iPod for your everyday idiot. Unfortunately, GP's gonna be wrong about the N900, again because of your average everyday idiot not seeing commercials and news stories and friends all over the place with them.

    36. Re:The n900 cometh... by 12345Doug · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't say you have to bend over backwards. I was hesitant to root my phone until I got tired of the slowness. It took about 5 Minutes (not counting download times) and there are apps that help with the process. Would I recommend it to every one? Probably not but I wouldn't hesitate to tell some one considering the move to try it.

    37. Re:The n900 cometh... by darkeye · · Score: 1

      I don't know about your android, on mine, I just say:

      su -

      and then approve that I really want to do that, and there I am...

    38. Re:The n900 cometh... by s4m7 · · Score: 1
      --
      This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
    39. Re:The n900 cometh... by s4m7 · · Score: 1

      not to mention how useful it is to have two batteries for your phone, so that if one dies, you can swap the other one in without having to find an outlet in an airplane/airport/taxi/commuter train

      --
      This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
    40. Re:The n900 cometh... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 2, Informative

      Being small costs a lot. Netbooks are cheap because they use relatively cheap components, usually underpowered and ordered in bulk to keep costs low. And they're still large enough that they can use some commodity components; hard drives, memory, adapters, etc., can all be borrowed from larger laptops. The problem is that miniaturization costs more as you get smaller and smaller. Once you drop below the netbook size range, into the sub-7" screens, it's hard to fit everything into the package without:

      • Overheating/Running out of power too quickly (both are linked to hardware with poor performance per watt)
      • Being massively underpowered
      • Being expensive
      • Sacrificing versatility

      One way or another, you'll have to compromise on the design; a general purpose phone that performs well without overheating will require expensive components. The phone can be much cheaper if it's less versatile and/or underpowered (which is how regular cell phones are kept in the $100 range). Similarly, a short battery life can keep costs down. Few phones compromise on this, but a lot of laptops and older MP3 players keep costs down this way. They require more frequent charging, allowing the use of either cheaper, more wasteful CPUs and storage or smaller/cheaper batteries.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    41. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'd think with just over 3/4 an inch in thickness they'd be able to fit a few more bands in there, at least sextuple for marketing purposes. fwiw, I liked it until I considered having in my pocket at all times an item with sufficient heft for bludgeoning.

    42. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love the way everyone bitches about how overpriced the iPhone is. Here in Australia we can buy phones outright, you can get a 16gb iPhone 3gs for au$879, but you can't get an android phone for less than au$1000 and with far less storage. The n900 is listed as us$650 (they don't list pre orders in Australia) which converts to around au$800 and then you need to factor in sales tax (australian prices already include it by law, no hiding the true price of goods over here), assuming 10% bringing the n900 to $880. Now taking into account that stuff never sells at the straight converted prices here (we're always being ripped off) I find it laughable to try and claim the n900 is going to be any cheaper than the iPhone

    43. Re:The n900 cometh... by mgblst · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Look, the n900 is a great phone, so was the n810, n800, n97, n95.

      If you think they are going to do anything like the iPhone in sales, you are an idiot. Having an amazing phone isn't enough.

      What do you people not understand, you still think it is a faster processor, or higher megapixel camera that sells phones. You are just complete morons.

    44. Re:The n900 cometh... by markdavis · · Score: 1

      On the Palm Pre Linux phone, it is even easier. Once you are in development (install an app to make that one click), you connect to it and you ARE root :)

      Might be too easy... hmm....

    45. Re:The n900 cometh... by fabs64 · · Score: 1

      Almost as closed? The Android platform itself is completely open and will run whatever you throw at it. Individual manufacturers and carriers may restrict your access to the radio/bootloader/kernel/wtfever but that's outside of the Android platform.

    46. Re:The n900 cometh... by RedK · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do understand Nokia is the biggest player in the industry right ? They already outsell the iPhone : http://www.theiphoneblog.com/images/stories/2009/08/121423-gartner_smartphone_2q09.png

      --
      "Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
      Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
    47. Re:The n900 cometh... by ducky10 · · Score: 1

      The C64 emulator was removed from the AppStore => With the N900, the equivalent service will be the Ovi Store.

      The OVI developer terms of service state (from Terms and Service link at https://publish.ovi.com/login): 5.4. Non-Compete. You may not use the Program to distribute or make available any Content whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of Content outside of the Program.

      So Nokia might not allow this app on their store either.

    48. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm just sayin'.

      You're just saying what?
      You seem to have omitted the object of your sentence.
      Or is this like MadLibs and we get to fill it in ourselves?

      I'm just sayin' "want fries with that?"
      I'm just sayin' "hey there, big boy."
      I'm just sayin' "like gag me with a teaspoon."
      I'm just sayin' maybe you should lay off the CNN for a while.

    49. Re:The n900 cometh... by mjwx · · Score: 2, Informative

      two words for you: "root access".

      on Android you have to bend over backwards to gain it

      Cough You were saying.

      Android is almost as closed as iPhone...

      Because Google vets Android Marketplace applications, actively tries to stifle hackers, readily bans or rejects applications on a whim (duplicates functionality), charges US$99 a year for the dev kit, has a killswitch and under no circumstances will open source the actual OS code.

      No...
      Wait...

      They dont.

      When installing applications:
      on the iphone I have to ask Apple's permission.
      on an Android phone it has to ask my permission.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    50. Re:The n900 cometh... by piltdownman84 · · Score: 1

      110.9 x 59.8 x 18 (19.55 at thickest part) mm

      Thats twice the size of a Blackberry Curve which I already think is a little on the large size.

    51. Re:The n900 cometh... by addsalt · · Score: 1

      Outside of the U.S., you don't have a phone bundled with the plan, but the plan itself is cheaper

      The general statement of "Outside of the U.S. is just flat out wrong - where exactly are you speaking of? My wife paid â99 for her iPhone with a â40 monthly contract here in France

    52. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. In my country, I bought my iPhone for over 650$ but my rental per month is 10$.

      For my 10$/month plan I get:
      444 mins of free calls
      444 free SMS.
      512 MB worth free download (sadly, no 3G yet on my network :(
      (extra calls/sms at 2 cents/min)

      This is just way too cheap when I'm told charges abroad.

    53. Re:The n900 cometh... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      I think I paid less than that for my iPhone, and I only spend about $10 a month on prepay, too.

    54. Re:The n900 cometh... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      Those hardware specs are nice (although, it's a bit chunky), but unless they've managed to put together an interface like the iPhone, it isn't going to take the iPhone's place, even for many technophiles. I'd like to be proved wrong, of course, since the iPhone needs some decent competition.

    55. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The C64 emulator was removed from the AppStore => With the N900, the equivalent service will be the Ovi Store.
      So Nokia might not allow this app on their store either.

      I don't know about Ovi, but I've had a C64 emulator on my E51 for years already (admittedly it's almost unusable without a proper keyboard).

      Ovi and App Store are not equivalent; unlike the App store, Ovi is not the only approved way to get software on Nokia phones.

    56. Re:The n900 cometh... by simplerThanPossible · · Score: 1

      Experience the Speed and raw Power of a 600 MHz processor! 256 MB RAM! 32 GB storage! 1999!

    57. Re:The n900 cometh... by No2Gates · · Score: 0

      That is my BIGGEST gripe about the iphone. The damn thing has such crappy battery life, and then for all practical purposes, you can't swap out the battery in the middle of the day if for some reason you actually "used" the phone for any amount of time and have no battery left. Apple says it's to help save us from ourselves. That's like welding the gas cap shut on a car.

      --
      Every time you call tech support, a little kitten dies.
    58. Re:The n900 cometh... by ducky10 · · Score: 1

      I agree with with what you are saying. Especially from a technophile point of view, the app store and ovi store are not equivalent in that the ovi store is not the only way to install apps.
      The C64 emulator might not be able to be added to the ovi store (if they consider it a threat to ovi); also an app manager might not be added to the ovi store (if they consider it a threat to ovi). But if you know how, you should still be able to install those things on your own.

    59. Re:The n900 cometh... by VoltageX · · Score: 1

      Released when?

      --
      "Anonymous could not immediately be reached for further comment." - International Business Times
    60. Re:The n900 cometh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can buy an ADP1 from google. Then its:
      $ su
      #

      not that much different...

  7. Because...... by Danathar · · Score: 2, Funny

    Having the C64 Basic interpreter as a programming environment on the iphone would strategically hurt Apple in horrible way....

    Riiiiight

    1. Re:Because...... by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 2, Funny

      You have no idea. Someone could have hand-written a BASIC program that could download a BASIC virus off the Internet that could spread to other phones running BASIC and it would have taken down the AT&T network!

    2. Re:Because...... by bdenton42 · · Score: 1

      They're probably more worried about someone using peek and poke in unintended ways.

    3. Re:Because...... by Entropius · · Score: 1

      It's down half the time anyway; how would we notice?

    4. Re:Because...... by Danathar · · Score: 1

      Don't need a virus, just a badly written BASIC program with nested goto and gosub lines...

    5. Re:Because...... by Danathar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Um...the coding of C64 software was ALL ABOUT using peek and poke in unintended ways!

    6. Re:Because...... by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      So any BASIC program will do?

    7. Re:Because...... by prockcore · · Score: 1

      Except peek and poke won't touch iphone hardware, they'll just touch the emulator.

    8. Re:Because...... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      They're probably more worried about someone using peek and poke in unintended ways.

      Can't figure out if this is a joke or not. Yes, PEEK and POKE originally let you hit the hardware of the host computer, which would be a massive security hole if you could do that to the iPhone itself. However, unless they've made a stupid (or intentional) hole, there's no way they'd let you "hit the hardware" of anything more than the virtual emulated C64, which should effectively be sandboxed.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    9. Re:Because...... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Um...the coding of C64 software was ALL ABOUT using peek and poke in unintended ways!

      Stop talking about my sex life! That's private!

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    10. Re:Because...... by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      No, only one with an infinite loop.

      10 GOSUB 20
      20 GOTO 10

      Of course, I don't see why this should hurt anything. It'll just overflow the stack on the emulator and the program will die. It shouldn't affect anything outside the emulated device.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  8. What a dumbass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    With all this publicity about his app he has to go and fuck it up. He could have made thousands.

    1. Re:What a dumbass by Renderer+of+Evil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I agree. The developer is a grade-A moron. Initially, the App was rejected because of this and after lots of back and forth Apple approved it with a condition of removing the BASIC interpreter. Developer thought it would be cute to hide, and make it available as an easter egg. Guess that plan backfired.

      Without a doubt, they needlessly burned a lot of money because of lost potential sales. Apple might even return the favor by dragging its feet and not approving the app for weeks or months.

    2. Re:What a dumbass by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I agree. The developer is a grade-A moron. Initially, the App was rejected because of this and after lots of back and forth Apple approved it with a condition of removing the BASIC interpreter. Developer thought it would be cute to hide, and make it available as an easter egg. Guess that plan backfired.

      Without a doubt, they needlessly burned a lot of money because of lost potential sales. Apple might even return the favor by dragging its feet and not approving the app for weeks or months.

      I agree. I also think it's funny that the grandparent anonymous coward got labeled a troll for saying something similar to you, only with less eloquence.

      While it's possible he thought the feature was truly gone and locked away, my guess is he was trying to be cute and leave it there as an Easter Egg.

      It stinks on a few levels.

      On one hand Apple's policies are draconian. Rejecting things left and right, some of which really should be released. It would be one thing if the Apple store was only a possible venue to get apps (like how I can get music from anywhere for my iPod) but being the only game in town AND locking everything out is annoying.

      On the other hand I can see some of what Apple is trying to do. It's a private market so free speech doesn't apply: they can prohibit "Adult" content and stupid apps if they want, on top of things that might violate the security of the device. Trojans, malware, viruses, etc. The store is their sandbox and they can do what they want... but having only 1 sandbox is restrictive.

      Back to the original topic, they guy shot himself in the foot. He probably tried to be cute and is now probably on Apple's blacklist, meaning his apps will probably get accepted at an even slower rate (if ever).

    3. Re:What a dumbass by iron-kurton · · Score: 1

      Dragging their feet deliberately sounds shady, if not illegal. IANAL, but I think a developer could take Apple to court to sue for lost sales, couldn't he?? (I mean, in the event he resubmits the app again, w/o the interpreter)

      I personally think Apple should stick to some kind of rule as to how long a developer has to wait before the app is approved, and pay out monetary damages in case it's been months and the app hasn't been approved yet (Google Voice comes to mind).

      --
      Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine -- Robert C. Gallagher
    4. Re:What a dumbass by dissy · · Score: 1

      Dragging their feet deliberately sounds shady, if not illegal. IANAL, but I think a developer could take Apple to court to sue for lost sales, couldn't he?? (I mean, in the event he resubmits the app again, w/o the interpreter)

      He already has his app approved, and was discovered trying to break his contract with Apple.

      So no, you can't really sue someone whom you broke a contract with. (Well, you CAN sue, but you will not win.)

      Additionally, apple already approved it. It is no one but the devs fault he isn't making money on it right now.

      If someone kept trying to screw you over, would you be so willing to let them skip to the front of the line to do it again? Or would you rightly say 'You will not get priority over the developers who CAN follow the rules and contract agreement'?

  9. C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by bzzfzz · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I would have laughed if you told me, back in the day, that future device makers would go to great lengths to lock out C64 BASIC so that users could use it to build applications that were so powerful that important third parties would be afraid. I know it's Turing-complete, but still.

    I have never been much of a believer in Stallman's dystopian visions but I'm getting closer to believing them.

    1. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by chriso11 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe they are coming out with a Apple ][ emulator, and it represents too much competition...

      --
      No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
    2. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by jpmorgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The computing world never turned into quite the dystopia that some feared, because the vertical integrators were mostly killed. Now, in the past I couldn't really care what Apple did because they were always a niche platform. But some disclosure: I hate the iPhone, I want it to die, or at least lose its dominant position. If the future of mobile computing is dominated by a company like Apple, then it's a bleak future. Say what you will about Microsoft's domination of the desktop, but they were never draconian like this.

      In the past being a Windows dev was compared to serfdom. If that's true, then what's being an iPhone developer like?

    3. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? The C64 was light years ahead of anything Apple did in those days. This is just apple pissing off devs and users of the platform. Even MS wouldn't pull this crap.

    4. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Microlith · · Score: 1

      Sure they were, they got called on it and damn near broken up. I have no doubt that if they weren't restrained by the government they'd be equally as harsh, if not moreso (see PlaysForSure.) And the day Apple is in a true monopoly position and they use it to drive a competitor out of the market (which is unlikely) then the hammer will fall on them. I don't see it happening any time soon.

      Also, Apple is effectively no worse than any console manufacturer. I suggest you direct your rage there as well (oh hey look microsoft is there too.)

    5. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by lotho+brandybuck · · Score: 1
      Ding Ding Ding!

      Apple is all about CONTROL of the user experience.. can't blame them for that and it works for the masses, (and makes me money as a shareholder,) but it makes my life hard sometimes. I run a linux desk at work and a Mac at home... and Openoffice (for me..) is nothing but trouble on the Mac. I finally downloaded Neooffice, it's a bit better. I was wondering the other day why they came up with Iwork, and didn't just improve Openoffice for Mac... Then I realized that they CONTROL Iwork... not Openoffice.

    6. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by oldhack · · Score: 1

      "In the past being a Windows dev was compared to serfdom. If that's true, then what's being an iPhone developer like?"

      Same thing. Well, maybe you need that "queer eye" things.

      --
      Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
    7. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slavery?

    8. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lose its dominant position.

      Its what?

    9. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Dominant position.

      See also: The bit you quoted just there...

    10. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by dyfet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dystopias usually are meant to illustrate what can go wrong and where it could potentially lead taken to it's logical extreme. However, that is not always the case. For example, unfortunately, western governments seem to have decided that "1984" was not a dystopic warning, but rather a blueprint to implement!

    11. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one it doesn't have. At best it's still even with Crackberries.

    12. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by indiechild · · Score: 1

      iPhone is nowhere near dominant in the mobile phone space! Nor is it in a monopoly position by any stretch of the imagination.

    13. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by mgblst · · Score: 1

      You must laugh a lot.

      They have a rule. They are following it. The rule applies for a c compiler, perl compiler, or c64 basic compiler.

      You do understand the concept of rules don't you?

    14. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by mjwx · · Score: 1

      In the past being a Windows dev was compared to serfdom. If that's true, then what's being an iPhone developer like?

      A serf at least has some rights (at least the upper classes did) would receive payment (or compensation in the form of a share of the harvest) and often had the chance to better their lot (I.E. work to buy a parcel land off the manor). A slave on the other hand has no rights, no chance for betterment.

      Windows Development isn't like serfdom (some companies are granted but this is case by case), its more like an really really bad job, such as sanitation engineer. You spend your days knee deep in excrement.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    15. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by An+dochasac · · Score: 1

      5 REM The world's least efficient C64/iPhone Malware
      10 FOR I = 40960 TO 65536
      15 REM COPY ROM BASIC to shadow RAM
      20 POKE I, PEEK(I)
      30 SAVE PEEK(I),1
      40 PRINT "Press Play and Record on tape!"
      50 WAIT 6502,1
      60 NEXT I
      70 PRINT "Send tape to another iPhone user by POST, UPS or Winston the Pigeon"

    16. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by bentcd · · Score: 1

      In the past being a Windows dev was compared to serfdom. If that's true, then what's being an iPhone developer like?

      Ever see The Matrix? :-)

      (Disclosure: I own an MBP and an iMac but wouldn't touch an iPhone or an iPod with a ten-foot pole)

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    17. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      I actually have a S60 device (n97) - it lets me run whatever I can download for it (assuming its compatible).

      I don't recall ever when Microsoft denied an application from running on their desktop (sans viruses). In fact I used to work for a 3rd party (Adobe) and they always went out of their way to make sure everything we made (even stuff that was end of lifed 8 years ago - example: there are shims for vista for Acrobat 5...) ran perfectly fine on their supported OS's. Granted we were the largest 3rd party, but they were always very helpful with everything when there were platform problems.

      They use their monopoly to bundle a browser with the OS, when you had to download Netscape over a modem, and got mad when OEM's bundled Netscape with Windows. There are other examples, but that's the one the government took them to court over.

      Same with Windows Mobile - never seen a case where they flat out denied an app from running on that platform - especially something as arcane as a c64 emulator. You can download a c64 emulator for Windows Mobile and it runs just fine on any smart phone with the resources.

      Iphone is just as bad as a console manufacturer - which I guess is why it drives some people nuts - its the only phone I'm aware of that is like this though.

    18. Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the AC was pointing out that it DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAVE ONE. It only has something like 30% of the smartphone market.

  10. New Speed Record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So that means that the record for "fastest hack using a C64" was just set, right?

    I'll call Guinness....

  11. Jesus Apple..... by Immostlyharmless · · Score: 1

    Get over it, really....

    Id be tempted at this point to just release the sucker in the wild and post up links to any and all places anyone who might even *slightly* want a c64 emulator for the iPhone might be, after restoring the BASIC functionality as it was in the c64. Just to spite em.....

    1. Re:Jesus Apple..... by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      Id be tempted at this point to just release the sucker in the wild and post up links to any and all places anyone who might even *slightly* want a c64 emulator for the iPhone might be, after restoring the BASIC functionality as it was in the c64. Just to spite em.....

      How are you going to do that when you can only install apps from the official app store (unless you root your phone)?

    2. Re:Jesus Apple..... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      "(unless you root your phone)?"

      You're blonde?

      People who object to Apple's treatment and wish to "object" in a meaningful way can easily root their phone. There are instructions all over the web, that don't require a person to be a highly skilled technician. Root it, install what you like, including the dreaded C64 emulator.

      Of course, you might want to avoid crossing any borders controlled by the United States' customs. Possession of a rooted iPhone will most definitely mark you as subversive.....

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    3. Re:Jesus Apple..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Robin Hood of hackerdom would write a worm which bricks iPhones but leaves jailbroken ones alone...

    4. Re:Jesus Apple..... by schon · · Score: 1

      People who object to Apple's treatment and wish to "object" in a meaningful way can easily root their phone.

      Or they could buy an Android phone, which not only "objects", but doesn't put money in Apple's pocket.

    5. Re:Jesus Apple..... by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      People who object to Apple's treatment and wish to object (no quotes) in a meaningful way can not buy an iPhone.

  12. Imagine a future.... by Danathar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Where the C64 emulator becomes THE preferred programming environment on the iphone as Apple neglects to understand the nature of the threat...causing a renisannce in C64 programming; catapulting a once dead platform from the grave back into stardom...

    1. Re:Imagine a future.... by Jay+L · · Score: 2, Funny

      catapulting a once dead platform from the grave back into stardom

      Stereo SIDPlayer:iTunes killer!

    2. Re:Imagine a future.... by fermion · · Score: 1
      Honestly the C64 emulator is not the problem, nor is there a particular threat to iPhone. The iPhone does what most want it to do, and solves the issue that makes people hate the Apple. In particular, it is cheap enough, and it plays games. Which is what most complain about when talking about the Apple. The iPhone has Apps, and now people want to complain that it does not have enough apps, or that this irrelevant app is not there. What do people want? It is a phone, it connects to the internet, it has games.

      It would be pretty to think that if Apple went back to it's more open roots, people would stop complaining. But that is just a world where people have to pay for equipment and don't have enough games to while away the what must extremely boring and painful days. So Apple does not have market share.

      Lets look at the past. I never needed games for Apple, because of the development tools. I spent hours playing with the shape table, making funny things happen with poke, and the like. Even on the Mac many fund things could be done. Sure, most people wanted store bought games, and I had a few, but making the machines do what I wanted to was the fun.

      Of course now the fun is over. All we have is store bought games, and now programming. That is the price we seem to have to pay for widely popular Apple phone. I suppose they could have gone another way, but then no one would have bought it because it did not play games. God help us if we might actually want to have some non corporate sponsored jam.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    3. Re:Imagine a future.... by Faust7 · · Score: 1

      The only way this could be better is if it were the Apple II environment. A belated triumph of Woz over Jobs.

    4. Re:Imagine a future.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dead platform? Hardly, the scene is well and truly alive. I'll be heading to Melbourne for the Syntax Demo Party and the parties in Europe are huge!

    5. Re:Imagine a future.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaaaaaaaaaargh.

  13. Apple tries REALLY hard... by IllForgetMyNickSoonA · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As it seems, Apple tries REALLY hard to surpass Microsoft on the list of the most hated IT companies. This stunt they just pulled with the C64 emulator is pure idiocy!

    1. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by Ohio+Calvinist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The issue is that if they allow this application, they'll have a harder time justifying denying other applications using interpreted languages. That seems like a non-story to me. Everyone has known from the beginning that that was the case, and that the reason was that if they allowed it, there would be no way of controlling it.

      However what I do think is interesting is that they'd allow any emulator at all. Particularly one whose games all depend upon an interpreted language. I'm primarily surprised because of the possibility that someone might be able to get unauthorized apps to run under it, not to mention any liability (real or assumed) a plantiff might try to claim if the emulator ran their code illegally and that Apple rubber stamped it knowing the possibility. Emulators have always been in that sort of gray-area. Apple is more than just the device manufacturer, all apps through the app-store have them functioning as a distributor.

      --
      Forgive my spelling from time to time. I'm often posting during short breaks.
    2. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by jpmorgan · · Score: 1

      I don't know, Apple hasn't really cared about consistent enforcement of App Store rules in the past.

    3. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by countSudoku() · · Score: 1

      I think they are a close second evil to M$. And this is just another fuck up in a long line of them from the once favored Crapple. *This* is why I only purchased the iPod Touch, instead of the iPhone; I didn't understand how badly they were going to botch the App environment for this "could-have-been-great" product. I see that they will never learn. Long live the iPod OS; your source for uninspiring games and a wealth of tip calculators, all safe and sane for the unwashed masses. Good luck with that.

      The more you tighten your grip, crApple, the more customers will slip through your fingers.

      I've already decided on Android. Fuck the closed iPod OS. If this happens on my McCurry desktops, then I'm only going to run Linux and Solaris at home, instead of the good three; McOS, Ubuntu, Solaris. Go ahead, crApple, make another closed product. I'll be sure to ignore it, just like the over-hyped iPhone. Why did people stand in lines to get screwed over by a device you can't put anything you want on?

      Android and Chrome, here I come!

      --
      This is the NSA, we're gonna geet U h@x0r5! Also, what is a h@x0r5?
    4. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by bennomatic · · Score: 5, Informative

      Particularly one whose games all depend upon an interpreted language

      C64 games typically were not written in BASIC, as the performance of BASIC sucked. Only the cheesiest type-it-in-yourself games were implemented this way.

      Most games were written in 6510 assembly, which was a very simple label-abstraction above 6510 machine language. Basically, the "assembling" process just changed the commands, like 'JSR' (jump to subroutine) to their binary equivalents (in this case, 00010000), and made sure that all two-byte numbers were big-endian. So JSR $FFD2, the command to print a byte to the screen became (in decimal) 032 210 255.

      Some assemblers were a little more advanced, with macros and the like so you could label a subroutine and it would substitute the appropriate register address, but I never believed in those. I edited my code directly to the bits, damn it!

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    5. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by IllForgetMyNickSoonA · · Score: 1

      And then again, 6510 assembly sucked big time when compared to my Speccy's Z80 assembly! :-)

      The only thing good about C64 was the sound chip (SID, wasn't it?) and - to an extent - the graphic engine (sprites - I had to program them on my own on the ZX Spectrum).

      Ah... memories...

    6. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I doubt any of those games depend on the built in basic of the C64.

      Also while Balmer can be crazy he does it have right its about 'developers'. Apple is just in a hurry to tick off the current generation. They did it with the Apple II, the III, the Lisa, the Mac, the newton, etc... Charging an arm and a leg the whole time. It made them seem cool but eventually relegated themselves into 'toy' category.

      There is a reason MS is in the position it is in instead of Apple. Apple was way more closed than MS could even dream of being. Apple was too busy trying to nickel and dime everyone at every turn. Then turning around and making sure they are in control of every aspect of the 'look'.

      I gave up on Apple eons ago. The last thing I bought from them was an ipod (6 years ago). I got tired of them shifting position everytime the computing winds suited them.

      They really have better hardware. Software is hit or miss in quality.

      This is not the case anymore but it shows what Apple is thinking. Had a boss tell me a true statement a few years ago, we were writing Apple and MS software (it was our main income for the application). He said 'in a few years no one will write for the Apple anymore.' I thinking him crazy ask 'why do you think that?' 'It is simple' he said, 'They charge too much to develop for them'. 'What do you mean?' I asked. 'I can buy 1 dev kit from MS for 500 bucks, less if I get it in volume. Apple wants 50k per developer per year. I can outfit 10 developers for that price.' They do not do that anymore but it shows how they think. They lost the tinkerers to BSD and Linux and the corp app dudes to MS. All that is left were the 'we will never give it up' guys. So now they make devices for fickle teenager fashion statements. They will now have to continuously reinvent their 'look' to keep the cash coming in.

      Dont worry the iPhone is this phone gens RAZR. It will be something else in a few years it may even be another iPhone.

      Apple is a company that makes cool gadgets that are occasionally useful. The trick is sorting out the garbage ones from the ones that are truly going to stay.

    7. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by lgw · · Score: 1

      A macro assembler can be as high-level a programming language as it wants to be. My favorite C64 assembler was built on top of C64 BASIC - you ran the program to assemble (compile) it. Very clever.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    8. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      SID II, baby! I think it could support up to four simultaneous distinct tones, each with their own pitch, timbre and ADSR envelope. When they built the Amiga, its sound was effectively just two SID II chips, for stereo, IIRC.

      Sprites were awesome, weren't they?

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    9. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      That is cool. I remember seeing ads for one that did what you describe. My recollection, however, was that the object code that came out of such assemblers back in those days was so bloated and inefficient that it was sometimes not much faster than using the interpreted BASIC.

      Of course, maybe I'm recalling theoretical hyperbole more than fact...

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    10. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      C64 games typically were not written in BASIC, as the performance of BASIC sucked. Only the cheesiest type-it-in-yourself games were implemented this way.
       
      Allow me to correct you.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    11. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The issue is that if they allow this application, they'll have a harder time justifying denying other applications using interpreted languages.

      That would only be an issue if they had to justify their rejections, which they don't. They reserve the right to reject any application for any reason or no reason at all.

    12. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where was this 20 years ago? http://www.theweb.dk/KickAssembler/Main.php

      JAVA scripting to help generate data tables and even asm commands.

    13. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by dkf · · Score: 1

      And then again, 6510 assembly sucked big time when compared to my Speccy's Z80 assembly! :-)

      Having written a fair amount of both Z80 and 6502 assembly (6510 asm is very similar) I can assure you that Z80 was nicer to think about. Of the 8-bit machines, the BBC had the nicest actual assembler (though I never had a Z80 module for one, so I had to make do with 6502's limitations).

      Still don't want to go back to writing either though, as it was a pain overall even with an assembler. I'm determined to try to write nothing lower-level than C ever again...

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    14. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The SID had three voices, not four. And the Amiga had sampled (4 bit, I believe) sound. Definitely not a SID.

      You could get add-on cards for the 64, though, with an extra SID for stereo.

      Ok, recently (less than a year ago), someone came up with a way of playing 8-bit sampled sound on the SID, but that's way outside of what it was meant to do.

    15. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Why deny anything based on functionality?

      If the app violates some network based term of use (I heard tethering on iphone is bad as an example) then fine, if the app doesn't pass quality assurance tests (which causes a crash on the phone) - fine, but if the app does something Apple doesn't like - and it doesn't have any network functionality - wtf?

    16. Re:Apple tries REALLY hard... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      I had hundreds of games on my C64, and while I never played your fargo sword game, the only BASIC involved in the great majority--and certainly anything that required anything like speed--was in the boot loader.

      Hence the use of the word "typically". Perhaps I went a bit overboard saying that "only the cheesiest" were written in Basic, but the only commercial game I remember owning that was written in BASIC was a math learning program. And it sucked big honking wieners.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
  14. Apple is worse than Microsoft by etymxris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When it comes to proprietary lock-in. Styling and hype is much more exciting than philosophical and economical arguments for having an open platform. I encourage anyone with appreciation of these issues to boycott closed platforms like the iPhone, consoles, and set top cable boxes.

    1. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by d3ac0n · · Score: 1

      No problem.

      I have no set-top boxes.

      I own no consoles.

      I have a Palm Pre with WebOS, the revolutionary linux based open operating system.

      You DO know that we have a REAL Homebrew community, with new apps being released every day that Palm has NO control over, right? As of this writing the homebrew app count is at 197 apps and growing. (Including My Tether, which I am using to connect to the internet with via my Pre and write this post.)

      Dump your iShackle. Free your Phone with the Palm Pre.

      --
      Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
    2. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      That's largely true, but it isn't because Apple is more evil than MS -- it's because MS is less competent and more lazy than Apple.
      And I've owned Macs since 1987, but this iPhone behavior is pretty dreadful. Glad I don't have one...

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    3. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by jpmorgan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know about that... with notable counterexamples (remember 'DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run?' and Netscape), Microsoft has generally been pretty hands off, encouraging people to develop whatever they want. It's somewhat ironic, but Windows Mobile is arguably the most open platform of all. It has no restrictions or policies, no centralized distribution channel, and it doesn't restrict your access to the hardware. My next phone will probably be Android, but even that doesn't give you root.

    4. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, but you're stuck with Sprint, the Apple of the cell phone world.

    5. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by tepples · · Score: 0

      I encourage anyone with appreciation of these issues to boycott closed platforms like the iPhone, consoles, and set top cable boxes.

      If not cable TV or video games, what are we supposed to use an SDTV monitor for?

    6. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I only use mine as a big external monitor when I want to watch videos or play games from my laptop, and occasionally watch broadcast television. That gives me more video than I have time to watch, so why bother with cable or set-top boxes?

    7. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      When it comes to proprietary lock-in, Microsoft doesn't look bad at all - Windows Mobile is a pretty open system where you've got root access, can install applications from anywhere and even have got third party development tools in addition to the Microsoft's ones. And you can even get large parts of the kernel sources.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    8. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are you posting on the internet if you are against closed platforms such as every ISP?

      This is about as silly as boycotting an IPOD because ITunes and the songs it distributes has DRM.

      Obviously people have no problem with DRM as demonstrated by the millions of users of the IPod and Itunes.

      "Styling and hype is much more exciting than philosophical and economical arguments"
      What the fuck is that gibberish supposed to mean, are you trying to sound smart without actually looking at Iphone sales and seeing they are already sucessful. *hint* Iphone has already basically outsold every other standalone phone developed and the users are still buying them.
      So basically unplug everything and lock yourself in a cave? Thanks, I love trolling people like you who are bitter at all the modern technology while others enjoy it every day.

    9. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Its the same with S60 (also open source) - there's really nothing the iphone can do that my nokia can't - and it doesn't care what apps I run on it.

    10. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Remember 'DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run?'

      Way to start the argument by quoting an old myth that has no ground in reality. You could have at least remembered OOXML or something.

    11. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      BS. I can get the data out of iCal, Mail, and Address book with no problems. Can't say the same for MS. I don't care about hardware and OS lock-in. My data is the most important thing to me.

    12. Re:Apple is worse than Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In this case, yes, and the iPhone is particularly bad, but OS X is in many ways much better, with its huge reliance on and contribution to open source software and technologies.

      I'm really looking forward to having a full gcc-replacement in LLVM.

  15. then what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Load"*",8,1

  16. You don't understand by jpmorgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Spur an interest in programmable platforms and maybe get people interested in being more than just a passive consumer of whatever crap Apple wants to shovel at them through iTunes.

    1. Re:You don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd have given that +1 Cynical Bastard, but it wasn't in the list, so I did +1 Interesting instead.

    2. Re:You don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Oh... so posting as AC (by ticking the "Post Anonymously" box) removes moderations, but without the warning you get if you don't tick the box? ("If you continue to post this comment, all moderations done to this discussion will be undone!")

    3. Re:You don't understand by jpmorgan · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Mmm, posted in the first ten minutes and moderated 'Redundant'. Whatever, I've got Karma to burn. Go at it, astroturfers!

    4. Re:You don't understand by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that particular quirk of slashcode has been known for years now. Log out to post as AC first.

    5. Re:You don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why you open a second browser to post AC.

    6. Re:You don't understand by ElKry · · Score: 1

      Or you could just stop being a Coward.

    7. Re:You don't understand by WiFiBro · · Score: 1

      That does not solve the problem that AC wants to moderate as well as comment on this topic.

    8. Re:You don't understand by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      I middle-click the "Reply" button to open the reply form in a new tab, where it automatically loads in an IETab because of the http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?*Reply* filter I created.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  17. Just Silliness by Pitr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I submit that anyone that conceivable _could_ do any damage of any significant nature through the BASIC interpreter on a C64 emulator on an iPhone has almost certainly already jail broken their phone and are already doing much wackier things. Further, if they haven't, then this provides further incentive to jailbreak.

    Add to that the PR nightmare of constantly pulling the same app repeatedly, and it should make both users and developers feel increasingly gun shy about the app store.

    --

    --Not to be worried, Pitr fix.
    1. Re:Just Silliness by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I submit that anyone that conceivable _could_ do any damage of any significant nature through the BASIC interpreter on a C64 emulator on an iPhone has almost certainly already jail broken their phone and are already doing much wackier things.

      Apple doesn't care if you jailbreak your own phone. That poses no risk. They care if you write arbitrary code that can be used to hack phones that aren't jailbroken. Thus, no applications that execute arbitrary code from other sources. It's the rule they made and developers have to stick to, even if in this case it is unlikely to be too serious.

      The reasons for this are twofold:

      First, they don't want people running an interpreter and installing apps on top of it, because one new app that runs on top, which Apple does not have an opportunity to test, could violate Apple's agreement with AT&T or break out of the sandbox and install malware. At that point Apple has to disable a whole swath of programs to stop one noncompliant or malicious program.

      Second, Apple doesn't want any runtimes becoming critical components of the iPhone. They don't want Java or .Net or a DOS emulator with intellectual property out of Apple's control to become a Gatekeeper for any significant number of applications on the IPhone. Apple wants to be the only gatekeeper and it's up to the buyer to decide if that is a good thing, a bad thing, or a mix of both.

    2. Re:Just Silliness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are missing the point. The SDK agreement said no interpreters, if you allow one you have a set a precedent and have to allow any and all through, and these may not be so harmless.

    3. Re:Just Silliness by lxs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Have you never watched War Games? In the wrong hands those 8-bit machines could destroy the world.

    4. Re:Just Silliness by jpmorgan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That doesn't make sense. Code that can break out of an emulator sandbox would be exploiting a security vulnerability. You could apply the same argument to say that Apple shouldn't allow email on the iPhone, because that could exploit some vulnerability and install malware. Which is particularly ironic given the iPhone's SMS vulnerability. An emulator is just a program that takes some user input and does something with it... there's nothing special there and any program which 'takes some user input and does something with it' is equally problematic.

    5. Re:Just Silliness by pseudonomous · · Score: 1

      I disagree; there's still (potentially) money to be made selling Iphone apps, probably more so than apps for any other smartphone platform, and most iphone users/ potential iphone users don't really care about c64 emulators or basic, so they won't pay much head to what Apple's doing here, so business will continue as usual. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but that's just the way things tend to turn out.

    6. Re:Just Silliness by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Informative

      That doesn't make sense. Code that can break out of an emulator sandbox would be exploiting a security vulnerability.

      Yes, it would.

      You could apply the same argument to say that Apple shouldn't allow email on the iPhone, because that could exploit some vulnerability and install malware.

      No, because an e-mail client on the iPhone is not designed to run arbitrary code. For arbitrary code to run using an e-mail client there has to be a vulnerability in the e-mail client which Apple failed to find when the approved the app (not that they look hard) and a second vulnerability in the sandbox which can be exploited using the first vulnerability.

      With applications designed to run arbitrary code they just need a vulnerability in the sandbox and they have the full range of a programming language to use, not just what can fit in the first exploit. In addition, if there is an e-mail client that breaks out of the sandbox, Apple can revoke the key and all the iPhones stop being vulnerable to the malware with just that client being affected. With a run-time that executes other code they have to revoke the run-time's key, disabling every program that relies upon it which, if they allowed such things, could be a significant portion of the applications.

      An emulator is just a program that takes some user input and does something with it... there's nothing special there and any program which 'takes some user input and does something with it' is equally problematic.

      I thought I was clear in my first post why it is problematic. If not, hopefully my clarification above has solidified the explanation. Applications that execute arbitrary code break Apple's reactive security model granularity and are a lot easier to use for creating malware.

    7. Re:Just Silliness by tknd · · Score: 1

      Apple doesn't care if you jailbreak your own phone. That poses no risk.

      Wrong. They do care, they just don't have a good way of enforcing it.

    8. Re:Just Silliness by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Wrong. They do care, they just don't have a good way of enforcing it.

      Why do they care? They've already made their money and a jailbroken phone is not supported and any security or other problems are moot since the user hacked it into an unsupported state. So, I can see why AT&T cares and Apple will do what they need to keep AT&T happy, but financially, Apple has no real incentive to do more than a token effort towards stopping jailbreaking. Apple is a corporation you know, pretty much ruled by the bottom line.

    9. Re:Just Silliness by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You know, I distinctly recall them lobbying to make jailbreaking illegal because "jailbroken iPhones can be used to commit terrorism by executing Denial of Service attacks on wireless networks!"

      Yeah. They so don't care.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    10. Re:Just Silliness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arbitrary code like, say, javascript?

    11. Re:Just Silliness by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Arbitrary code like, say, javascript?

      As I understand applications on the iPhone are required to use the Apple supplied javascript libraries via their APIs. It's one of the reasons there are so few competing Web browsers for the iPhone. They can use javascript, but only in that it is part of the normal dev environment.

    12. Re:Just Silliness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still arbitrary code. And security holes can be patched just like the C64 interpreter.

  18. Brainfuck by Lord+Lode · · Score: 1

    Damn so it's forbidden to release any app that can actually some Turing complete code? I guess a Brainfuck app for the iPhone is out of the question too then!

    1. Re:Brainfuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you accidentally a word.

    2. Re:Brainfuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess a Brainfuck app for the iPhone is out of the question too then!

      You forget that Apple is very inconsistent.

    3. Re:Brainfuck by Lord+Lode · · Score: 1

      Yes I did. No editing on /. is annoying sometimes.

  19. This is what makes corporations EVIL by Skapare · · Score: 1

    ... by releasing crippleware.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  20. I know why this happened by TiggertheMad · · Score: 5, Funny

    They are still bitter that C64 games were better than Apple ][e games back in the day...

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:I know why this happened by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I don't know, I had a GREAT pirated Pac-Man game for the IIe, it was identical to the ones you put quarters in. The HHGTG pretty well sucked afaiwc, because I never could get on the Vogon ship. But iirc that was out for the C-64 and about every other computer at the time as well.

    2. Re:I know why this happened by Knara · · Score: 3, Informative

      The best thing about later re-releases of the infocom games (I specifically remember Planetfall and HHGTTG) was that it had an integrated hint system with 3 progressively detailed levels (i.e. "hint" number one would be "maybe you need something sticky", "hint" number two would be "gee that stick of gum looks good", and "hint" number 3 would be "pick up gum, open gum, chew gum, use gum on broken lever").

      Pretty sure you had to use the Sub-Etha Sens-O-Matic ("Electric Thumb") to get on the Vogon ship.

    3. Re:I know why this happened by Peredur · · Score: 1

      The other thing to remember is that "Thing your Aunt gave you" is a container. Put everything you can into it.

    4. Re:I know why this happened by diamondsw · · Score: 1

      Note that such games are available in Z-Code form and will run just fine in Frotz, which is on the App Store (nevermind that it *also* is a code interpreter and accepts outside games...).

      --
      I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
    5. Re:I know why this happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure you had to use the Sub-Etha Sens-O-Matic ("Electric Thumb") to get on the Vogon ship.

      Couldn't you put a SPOILER WARNING alert on this post? Now the game is ruined. Thanks a lot, pal.

    6. Re:I know why this happened by Froboz23 · · Score: 1

      (nevermind that it *also* is a code interpreter and accepts outside games...)

      Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
      You'll blow our cover!

      --
      Take off every Sig. For great justice.
    7. Re:I know why this happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The statute of limitations on spoilers is only ten years, man.

    8. Re:I know why this happened by wwwillem · · Score: 1

      >
      > Shhhhhh..............
      >

      So you think that people employed by Apple are reading Slashdot and can't afford more than living in their parent's basements playing video games?? :-)

      --
      Browsers shouldn't have a back button!! It's all about going forward...
    9. Re:I know why this happened by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Couldn't you put a SPOILER WARNING alert on this post? Now the game is ruined. Thanks a lot, pal.

      Relax, he'll never figure out how to stop the babelfish from falling into the drain or being scooped up by the flying robot.

      ...

      Goddamn robot. :/

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    10. Re:I know why this happened by Big+Hairy+Goofy+Guy · · Score: 1

      Apple ][e

      It's Apple //e.

      Apple ][ and Apple ][+ are correct (IIRC) but the //e was always //e.

    11. Re:I know why this happened by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      C64 games are better than many mobile phone games today.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    12. Re:I know why this happened by JoshNorton · · Score: 1

      The hint system was just an in-game implementation of the InvisiClues that they used to make. The electronic implementation was introduced in the Solid Gold line of discount repricings of the big classic games without feelies and such. (H2G2, Planetfall, Zork I, Wishbringer, and Leather Goddesses of Phobos were the series.)

      Later on, they added it to a couple of first releases as well - I know that Nord and Bert Couldn't Make Head nor Tail of it had it as well.

      --
      "Stupid! Stupid stupid stupid stupid! I touched the hot wire right there - I'm an idiot!"
  21. Intentional or oversight? by evil_aar0n · · Score: 1

    If this was intentional, I can imagine Apple would be none too happy. Might even yank the developer's credentials. If it's an oversight, I'm surprised it got by testers.

    --
    Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
  22. Exactly why I don't buy Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Support free/open source! This shows why I wouldn't buy a cell phone like the iphone. It's not my-phone, it's Steve's phone. the i is = Steve. Yeah, it's cool and such, but the costs of ownership (you pay Apple to restrict your property!) just isn't worth it.

  23. Looks like... by zr-rifle · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...they learned how to jailbreak their Commodore 64 too...

    --
    Hack your mind out of its sandbox.
    1. Re:Looks like... by bennomatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not called "jailbreaking". It's called "Run/Stop - Restore".

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
  24. Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by ad454 · · Score: 1

    More and more companies are looking to Apple as an example on how to lock down their platforms. Expect other companies (Microsoft, Amazon, Google, etc.) to start doing the same type of lockdown with their devices/OS. So, unless you plan on living in a cave the rest of your life counting your toes, boycotting flagship tech companies is not practical. The only real solution is to legalize and strengthen fair use, so that jail breaking and other DRM circumvention is completely legal and encouraged.

    Once you jailbreak an iPhone and iPod Touch, it becomes an awesome portable Unix device. I have jailbroken nearly a dozen iPhones/iPodTouches for friends and family, and tell everyone to do the same.

    I am still very disappointed that Google did not release their Google Voice app onto the Cydia, Icy, and other alternative app stores.

    The US and other governments should also declare Apple's App Store to be an illegal monopoly for their platform and force Apple to allow other app stores to work without jailbreaking/hacking their devices.

    1. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I am still very disappointed that Google did not release their Google Voice app onto the Cydia, Icy, and other alternative app stores.

      Since they instead put the missing features which would be covered by a special app into the mobile web interface (they were always in the "regular" web interface) to Google Voice so you don't need an app at all, I don't see why anyone would be disappointed.

    2. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      Half a year ago I'd have agreed. I'm just tired of it now though. The novelty of jailbreaking has worn off, and now I'm just getting weary of all the hastles which go with it. The api changes, waiting for cracks for every new upgrade, having to check to make sure the jailbreaking method is stable for each release, every update meaning some apps will stop working for a while and may or may never get the functionality back. It's getting monotonous.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    3. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      More and more companies are looking to Apple as an example on how to lock down their platforms.

      True. Hopefully some others will come up with a better model that provides the advantages of the iPhone's lock-in without the disadvantages.

      The only real solution is to legalize and strengthen fair use, so that jail breaking and other DRM circumvention is completely legal and encouraged.

      That actually won't matter much. The real solution is to deal with the antitrust issues in adjacent markets so we can have properly operating competition and someone can make a better solution without having to kowtow to AT&T and the MPAA and RIAA and several other criminal gatekeepers.

      The US and other governments should also declare Apple's App Store to be an illegal monopoly for their platform...

      That's not how antitrust law should or does work. The iPhone is only one (admittedly high profile) player in a very large and diverse marketplace. Apple has done nothing to undermine any market in their technical decisions for the iPhone (although some of their partners have). In terms of antitrust law, in fact, Apple is one of the victims being forced to make choices that get them fewer sales because of illegal actions by their partners.

      If people don't like iPhones being locked down, they can effectively vote with their wallets and buy any number of other phones both for use on AT&T's network or another. Apple has, in no way leveraged any monopoly influence in any market in what they're doing with the ecosystem for apps on the iPhone.

    4. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jailbreaking is no viable solution. DRM systems will become more effective and vendors can make using jailbroken devices arbitrarily cumbersome or risky for the user. DRM is anticompetitive and should be illegal, plain and simple.

    5. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by DrOct · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure jailbreaking is perfectly legal already.

    6. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Hopefully some others will come up with a better model that provides the advantages of the iPhone's lock-in without the disadvantages.

      What advantages?

      Oh, you mean, advantages for the manufacturer and/or phone company? But these always translate to extra cash in the end, and that cash has to come from someone's pockets, so I don't see how you could possibly have "advantages without the disadvantages" here.

    7. Re:Legalize and Encourage Jail Breaking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with you on "legalize jailbreaking" but not on encouraging. If I'm going to encourage anything, it'll be to encourage people to buy decent phones that don't need jailbreaking in the first place. I understand you want the iPhone itself to be a good platform, but it will always be second-rate. Perhaps you have one, or have friends who have one. I'm sorry, but this bullshit was foreseen before the phone even hit the market. Learn and don't let your next phone have the same flaws.

  25. Apple ph33rs by idontgno · · Score: 1

    the power of POKE.

    And rightly, too. It's iPhone red pill.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    1. Re:Apple ph33rs by molecular · · Score: 1

      the power of POKE.

      from above link:

      poke 1,0 Disable Operating System (Default Value 1,1)

      So that's why apple had to remove that app!

  26. The Point? by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 4, Funny

    "By setting the keyboard to 'always on', launching a game and restarting BASIC, players got into the 'empty shell' of their C64 emulator."
    ---

    Next thing you know they'll block my app that allows users to connect a cassette tape drive. The nerve....

  27. Long live line numbers! by Danathar · · Score: 1, Redundant

    10 Print "I love Line numbers!"
    20 Goto 10

    1. Re:Long live line numbers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5 Let a=0
      10 Print "I love Line numbers!"; a
      15 Print
      20 let a=a+1
      30 goto 10

  28. Ready to worship by Qubit · · Score: 1

    So how open is the n900 going to be?

    The Pre is nifty, but a large chunk of the OS and all of the base applications are proprietary Palm stuff. So it's pretty darn close, but we're just not quite there yet.

    Is there any chance of having the base install for the n900 be completely FOSS? I wish I had the time to hack on phones and write this stuff myself, but (like a lot of other people) I keep on finding my schedule too busy to get started.

    It's 2009 and I can buy a laptop that runs a FOSS OS and FOSS applications pretty much perfectly. When can we have the same for a phone?

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
    1. Re:Ready to worship by AlXtreme · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is there any chance of having the base install for the n900 be completely FOSS?

      Sure, see maemo. I doubt you'll have complete to access the phone-part of the n900 though, the telcoms being rather cautions on what they allow on their networks.

      The n810 is a nice little open pda, but as it isn't a phone I don't use it that much. If the n900 is at least half-decent, it will replace my nokia for sure. Bubye S60!

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
    2. Re:Ready to worship by tepples · · Score: 1

      Is there any chance of having the base install for the n900 be completely FOSS? [...] It's 2009 and I can buy a laptop that runs a FOSS OS and FOSS applications pretty much perfectly.

      You said "completely". Which laptop do you recommend for use with coreboot (free BIOS replacement) and gNewSense (free OS with no "fair use" drivers)?

    3. Re:Ready to worship by Microlith · · Score: 1

      If they do things right, the baseband is a USB device and its driver in the kernel is open source. Considering that half tends to be an entire computer unto itself in most phones, there's no reason it can't be completely isolated logically, and allow a fully open source software stack on the OMAP.

    4. Re:Ready to worship by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Pre's card interface is pretty slick. I just wonder if it or the n900 will be more open, and will have more cleared apps in their store (no trojans).

      Ahh well. I hope my old phone's battery lasts till October so I can compare the two before buying. I'm tempted to just go with the pre now.

    5. Re:Ready to worship by Qubit · · Score: 1

      You said "completely". Which laptop do you recommend for use with coreboot (free BIOS replacement) and gNewSense (free OS with no "fair use" drivers)?

      Just to clarify, I did use "completely" to refer to the n900, not to the laptop in that paragraph... :-)

      Last I checked, coreboot isn't running on any laptops. Laptop manufacturers are unwilling or unable to give developers specs for some or all of the hardware in their machines, so it's a non-starter. Get the hardware docs released and we might get somewhere.

      The OLPC has a FOSS stack, including OpenFirmware, but I believe that the wireless card may use a closed firmware, so you'd have to stick an external wireless card in there for complete freedom.

      Stallman is using a Lemote laptop with a MIPS processor that runs only Free Software.

      --

      coding is life /* the rest is */
  29. Apple Hates Geeks by popo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No seriously. Apple hates geeks. This isn't flamebait, btw.

    Apple loves the image-conscious, visual-creative crowd that accepts the functionality they're given, wrapped up in beautifully designed packages.

    But ultimately Apple's corporate strategy can be summed up in one word: Control. They want to control where you buy your music, what you do with your devices, and how you interact with other users. All of this 'control' of course is driven by profit motives.

    But geeks ultimately represent a loss of control. Geeks love to tinker... They love to expand functionality. They're innovators. And worst of all from Apple's perspective: They create options.

    Options are the enemy of a carefully structured system which drives users towards Apple's sacred points-of-purchase.

    Options are the opposite of 'control'.

    For all of Apple's "Think Different" public image, the reality is that Apple encourages nothing of the sort: "Think Alike" is the mission. And they prove it at every turn.

    Apple fanboys will probably mod this flamebait. It isn't. I have multiple computers and phones, and own an iPhone and a Mac. But I'm constantly being made aware that my PC represents a nearly infinite amount of options in every usage category -- where Apple railroads me into a pre-approved (albeit always compatible) solution.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    1. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT UP

    2. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, Apple and "always compatible". You're quite the comedian.

    3. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by plawsy · · Score: 1

      But geeks ultimately represent a loss of control. Geeks love to tinker...

      Which is why only one Steve is still at the top of the Apple org chart ...

    4. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's ironic that Apple wouldn't exist without Steve Wozniak, one of the geekiest tinkerers of all time.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by AP31R0N · · Score: 2, Interesting

      (This reply is not for popo's benefit.)

      You're right about the control. That's how they shape the "Apple Experience". i despise Apple and it's products, and most of their fans. But i can tell you this from my conversations with Mac Heads on /. and Fark: Apple is all about the experience of a system that is hard to mess up. They trade freedom for security. Apple's control is about giving you a standard issue item. "You'll have it our way and like it". Not out of meanness or just to make more money, but so that the users have that sense of "everything is going to be ok and just like it was yesterday".

      Windows has to run on perhaps hundred of mother boards. OSX has to run on a handful... all of which are made by Apple. Remember, Apple is a hardware company, not a OS company. The flexibility needed in Windows to run on hundred of possible combinations of mobo, RAM, HD and CPU means that it can't be quite as tight as OSX. OSX gets part of its stability and predictability from the fact that the hardware is all known and tightly controlled. If Dell was the ONLY way to get a Windows machine you'd quickly see it become far more stable as there would be fewer variables (and fewer options).

      Console -- Mac -- PC -- Linux

      That might be the Security to Freedom continuum. Consoles are hard coded and pretty hard to mess up. A PC is easy to mess up for an incompetent user (i never have the problems people who bitch about windows seem to have). Linux might be the most at the mercy of the user. Alas, there's just not much compatible with it.

      Having an Apple product is like living with over protective parents. They love you, they take care of you and give you all kinds of treats. But ultimately you're very limited. In the case of their products, i guess it's a trade off the user must make. The warm cocoon, or the scary wilds. i prefer the scary wilds... because i can handle it.

      Also you could point out the grammatical error in the slogan....

      --
      Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    6. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by foqn1bo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which is exactly why Apple gives away all their development tools for free, and why the built their current flagship software product on top of BSD, drawing significant interest and new users from the Linux crowd.

      Apple doesn't hate geeks, it hates the way many geeks think that because they're so smart, they're automatically good at everything. The Unix that is OS X and the iPhone platform provide plenty of room for tinkering -- perhaps less so on the iPhone -- but it's not like everything Mac is a lifeless void. What Apple doesn't like you doing is trying to one-up them at their own game. For instance, if Apple made it easy for you install themes the way you might in any number of Linux window managers, chances are pretty good that you'll just make your computer hideously ugly and then have the audacity to show it to all your friends. This isn't a chance they'd like to take, being that their niche is in good design (how depressing is it that good design is a niche market?).

      These beautifully designed packages you passingly deride are what make computers usable. In the case of the iPhone, seriously, the vast majority of apps in the store are awful, even adhering to Apple's design guidelines and making use of their standard UI toolkits. Imagine what we would end up with if programmers had total control over the system. In my eyes, it would result in a sharp decrease of users as the typical iPhone would be less stable, potentially less secure, and certainly more confusing as apps would depart more significantly from the accepted set of standards. Practically every rule in their SDK license has some similar reason behind it, even if a few of them are overkill. Background processes can drain battery life. Interpreted code environments (especially user-generated code, which is the biggest concern IMHO) can make it difficult for Apple to evaluate the spectrum of how an app might perform in real use (or fail to perform), which is a real concern for those who care about all the little details of packaging and interface design.

      It used to bother me how much Apple locks things down, but I have to admit that they've been really successful in creating a pleasing, easy to use, and reasonably flexible system that also brings with it a thriving market ecosystem. Essentially none of the other smartphone manufacturers and platforms have come even close to this. It certainly makes you wonder if an open platform is really the solution to the "iPhone Killer" problem.

    7. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No seriously. Apple hates geeks. This isn't flamebait, btw.

      No, not flamebait, just idiocy. Apple is largely made of geeks. I find it hard to find a more apt description of a former NextStep employee or a former BSD developer or the guy who wrote and maintains CUPS.

      But ultimately Apple's corporate strategy can be summed up in one word: Control.

      Actually, Apple's strategy with regard to both the iPod and iPhone has been about limited, but polished functionality. Blackberry has been all about providing the most and most varied functionality. Apple has been about providing a limited subset of that functionality, but polished so it is really, really easy. In order to do that, and maintain that for submissions from others, they maintain significant control; but that is not the core philosophy.

      I would note that this strategy is not one designed to cater to geeks. That is certainly not their target market and if you are a hardcore geek you might be happier using a product that does cater to your market segment. There are lots of other options. Go for it.

      For all of Apple's "Think Different" public image, the reality is that Apple encourages nothing of the sort: "Think Alike" is the mission. And they prove it at every turn.

      I'd actually say Apple does think differently. Their business model has been different from what others have tried and it has worked for them quite well. It just hasn't targeted you. Get over it.

      For their Mac computers, on the other hand, Apple has been targeting geeks pretty heavily and it has worked. Look around at Blackhat or Defcon or any technology related conference and the truth is evident. OS X developers (some of whom are also iPhone developers) are geeks and they target geeks in OS X. That's why they have a bash shell. That's why they pulled in UI features from X11 to make the UNIX geeks looking to switch happy. Normal users don't care about or use multiple desktops and never drop to a shell. That's just for geeks. I know a few people at Apple. One used to work for Cray doing OS development. He's about as big of a geek as you can imagine.

      Apple fanboys will probably mod this flamebait. It isn't. I have multiple computers and phones, and own an iPhone and a Mac. But I'm constantly being made aware that my PC represents a nearly infinite amount of options...

      It's funny because you did not provide even one example of how the PC provides more options than your Mac... something rather critical to your premise, no?

    8. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No seriously. Apple hates geeks. This isn't flamebait, btw.

      No, not flamebait, just idiocy.

      yeah ok... go hug your Steve Jobs binky now...

    9. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Devistater · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure apple charges a fee for iphone developement stuff.

    10. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by foqn1bo · · Score: 3, Informative

      They charge a fee if you want to send builds to a device, or publish in their store, but the SDK itself, and its associated dev tools, are free as in beer.

    11. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Niedi · · Score: 1

      I agree with the iPhone, it's definitely NOT meant for geeks....
      but with a mac?
      x11 (was pretty awful but 2.4 is quite good), bash, the most important command-line tools, it's all there.
      Of course not OFFICIALLY documented, but well documented by a lot of geeks online. And if you want more, just get macports.
      You can tinker all you want on OSX, if you're not afraid of the CLI.
      Personally I'm using a mac at work with Gimp, Inkscape, OsiriX and LyX being the programs I use most.
      I use Thunderbird for mailing and Mozilla for surfing. I could use Songbird but I must admit I like iTunes better, so yeah that one goes to apple. Still I don't really see what your hating geeks-argument is all about when it comes to the mac platform.
      They might want to control the AVERAGE user but I have the feeling that they simply don't mind the geeks. On a mac, they don't officially offer advanced options but they also don't lock up the system leaving you to tinker all you want. So if you just want everything to instantly work and work well you will end up using the software apples throws in front of you. If you don't mind spending some time trying you can use whatever you please. And they at least don't pull any WGA or PleaseEnterThisLaughablyLongKey crap which I'm mighty thankful for. So yeah, I don't see the railroad you're referring to...
      And with the iphone? Get an open platform if you want to set a sign or jailbreak the thing if you don't care.
      I was given an ipod touch some time ago and it offers some neat possibilities after jailbreaking. Still, if the N900 turns out to be any good I would go for that. Too bad the Freerunner was such a friggin huge brick...

      enough ramblin

    12. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Trogre · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It certainly is. And more telling that he's not there now.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    13. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by lennier · · Score: 1

      "Apple loves the image-conscious, visual-creative crowd that accepts the functionality they're given, wrapped up in beautifully designed packages."

      This is a great description of Apple's mission and core userbase.

      But I wonder at the irony of what's happening. Why is it that "creative" types are actually the most *un*creative when it comes to modifying the technology they use?

      They'll happily create visual artwork... "rip, mix, burn" their music... but they won't even think to remix their devices technologically. They don't see being tethered as a threat to their creative lifeblood like hackers do. There's no huge outcry from the "creatives" against these creative shackles.

      Seriously, what's with that? Why are "creatives" so uncreative in practice? Why do "designers" not practice ACTUAL design?

      This goes to the root of my frustration with "design". A lot of it seems obsessed with surface... with look, fashion, trend... very little of what is taught as design is actually how to design products. Just how to take someone else's design (the engineer) and put a shell or skin on it so it *looks* cool or stylish. But that's not design at all; that's cosmetics and marketing.

      But there's also a literal fascistic connection to design too... a lot of the cult of big-D Design is also about the deliberate worship of centralised control. Look at architecturally designed houses which have to come with their own custom-built furniture. Great integration... but now you're locked into a single source for products and support, and you don't have any freedom to remix or compose elements. A lot of the Modernist 1930s designers had this approach, and it spilled over into, yes, literal Fascism. Which wasn't, on the surface, a necessarily evil ideology... it was about working together, creating a unified social state through conscious design... but it *was* about very deep, pervasive control, and the fruits of that weren't pretty. Apple are eating from that Big Design tree.

      I think we need to seriously rethink a lot of what passes for the settled wisdom of design, and take a look at, for example, the work of Christopher Alexander - radical democracy in design. Like science fiction (see Norman Spinrad's "The Iron Dream"), which also had literal fascist connections from the same Modernist school, there's a lot of unquestioned assumptions which are still screwing us up.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    14. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by SETIGuy · · Score: 2, Informative
      "You can have this free beer as long as you don't drink it."

      That doesn't count as "free as in beer" in my book.

    15. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by foqn1bo · · Score: 1

      "You can have this free beer as long as you don't drink it."

      That doesn't count as "free as in beer" in my book.

      Maybe this analogy is failing. All I was trying to point out is that you're perfectly welcome to use their SDK and write iPhone apps, test them in the free simulator, etc, without paying a dime. The $99 fee lets you test on a real device and/or deploy to the store. I can see being annoyed at not being able to deploy to your own phone (that's one of the things I'd most like for them to change) without paying, but access to the store? That's fair game, as far as I'm concerned. They've gone to the trouble of creating this ecosystem, setting up all the infrastructure necessary for you to deploy your app to potentially hundreds of thousands of users, and handle all the financial transactions. All you have to do is write it, and of course, pay them $100.

      Perhaps brick and mortar comparisons are just as useless, but if I make some gadget, I don't see why any store on the block would be obligated to accept it as merchandise and put it on their shelves. Apple charging me for access to their system simply means that all I have to do is invent and build the gadget. They even take care of the packaging. Seems like a pretty fair deal to me.

    16. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Apple fanboys will probably mod this flamebait."

      Well I'm no Apple fanboy, but I am a Mac "fanboy". And that's why I agree with you.

      Apple hasn't sold a real Macintosh since it stopped selling machines that natively boot Mac OS 9. OS X is a piece of crap with a "Mac" label slapped onto it, and the iPhoney is even worse. Newton MessagePads are still infinitely better devices than the "steve jobs mobile revenue kiosk".

    17. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by mjwx · · Score: 1
      Calm blue oceans fanboy, calm blue oceans

      I'd actually say Apple does think differently. Their business model has been different from what others have tried and it has worked for them quite well. It just hasn't targeted you.

      How do you figure that?

      Apple is the last of the old school Vertical Integrators. Every other vertical integrator in IT was killed by MS (I'm old enough to remember when MS was the upstart, the knight in shining code come to save us from the evil lords of Unix in their ivory towers, keep in mind this was before Linus even finished high school and Free Software was a nit in RMS's hair*). Everything Apple does is to combine the Hardware, Software and Service stack in the same way as IBM did in the pre-windows mainframe days. Apple was almost killed by this until MS pulled them out with a 150 Million USD cash injection in the hopes of using them in their Anti-Trust trial.

      Apple is the last of a very old and practically dead style of management, the idea that what your customer can do with your product is 100% controlled by you, you decide what hardware they use, you decide who can service that hardware and you decide what software runs on that hardware.

      So again, how do you figure that Apple's business model is "new". I suspect you've drunk the kool-aid and are "thinking different(TM)". Different(TM) is entirely defined by Apple(R).

      It's funny because you did not provide even one example of how the PC provides more options than your Mac

      OK, one thing...

      AMD processors, Competitive hardware pricing/vendors, error free connectivity to domains. Wait, that's three.

      Apple really hates geeks because of two reasons, 1. they ruin the image of the "cool" mac, look at the way Apple portrays geeks in their advertising. 2. Geeks change things, they will hack and tinker. This causes Apple to lose control which is the one thing they prize above all else. * - I'm actually a supporter of FOSS, not quite as passionate as RMS but I have nothing against the man. Also I realise that MS changed a lot and is nothing like the company that heralded desktop computing back in the 80's but still have to give them credit for that even with the damage they've done since.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    18. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by ashpool7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some of use prefer the over protective parents because we can get more important stuff done when we're not forced to waste time fending off bears and skunks in the scary wilds.

      Pretty good analogy there.

    19. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it's as much Apple hating geeks as you hating Apple and thinking you represent all geeks...

    20. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1

      For all of Apple's "Think Different" public image, the reality is that Apple encourages nothing of the sort: "Think Alike" is the mission. And they prove it at every turn.

      Examples, please?

    21. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Alanis+Morissette · · Score: 1

      But I'm constantly being made aware that my PC represents a nearly infinite amount of options in every usage category -- where Apple railroads me into a pre-approved (albeit always compatible) solution.

      Doesn't your Mac also afford you with a nearly infinite amount of options? I'm not saying what the outcome would be but to be fair you would have to compare the iPhone with rival phones, NOT with a PC.

    22. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OS X text widgets obey emacs keyboard shortcuts. If that's not pro-geek, I don't know what is.

    23. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by dangitman · · Score: 1

      But geeks ultimately represent a loss of control. Geeks love to tinker... They love to expand functionality. They're innovators.

      I thought geeks like to bite the heads off chickens.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    24. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What Apple doesn't like you doing is trying to one-up them at their own game."

      Oh come on. Do you really think that constitutes any sort of a "geek friendly" position? That's the most fascist, restrictive description I can imagine. "You're free to tinker as long as you don't make anything better than we did."

      lulz.

    25. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by popo · · Score: 1

      If one puts this into a political analogy: You're advocating fascism. I'm advocating democracy.

      Because what if businesses could do whatever they wanted? What if open market forces actually dictated success and failure? What if people could speak their minds? There'd be chaos! Far better to have a society where everything is perfected by the strong hand of government. = APPLE.

      --
      ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
    26. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Antiocheian · · Score: 1

      I love it when Apple fanboys ask for examples!

      "It's funny because you did not provide even one example of how the PC provides more options than your Mac... something rather critical to your premise, no?"

      Take a look at this:

      Download.com > Educational Software > Science Software for windows
      http://download.cnet.com/windows/educational-software/?tag=ltcol;nav

      Download.com > Educational Software > Science Software for mac
      http://download.cnet.com/mac/science-software/3150-2054_4-0.html

      Look at the number of titles on the left. Compare the number of PC titles to Mac titles.

      Then have a look here:

      http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_family.html

      How many options for Mac can you find?

    27. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Take a look at this:

      Umm, you can run Windows on a Mac you know, right? We're talking about how PC's provide users with more options for geeks, as in how Apple's products are artificially restricting "geeks". Software developed for Windows doesn't count until Apple intentionally prevents people from running Windows on Macs.

      Then have a look here:

      Again, you seem to have completely missed the topic we were discussing. Unless Apple is preventing NVidia from offering cards for the Mac, that doesn't apply. Please try to keep up and stay on topic.

    28. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      How do you figure that? Apple is the last of the old school Vertical Integrators...

      Actually, they're more of a new school company whose model sometimes fits into vertical integration and sometimes consists of polished integration with partners. What Apple has been doing differently is finding market segments that are very small due to poor usability and overall user experience. They then create a product that opens up that market to the general public by creating an entry that may not be the most powerful or have the longest list of features, but actually works easily and well for the general public.

      For the ipod this used vertical integration because no one else made the parts Apple needed to make it work. For the iPhone Apple tried to partner with several cell service providers before going with AT&T as the only one willing to make the concessions Apple needed for the level of functionality and ease of overall experience required. In both cases they opened a market to non-geeks. Another good example of this strategy would be the Nintendo Wii, which relied upon much the same ideas and which some analysts claimed used the iPod as a marketing model.

      It's funny because you did not provide even one example of how the PC provides more options than your Mac

      OK, one thing... AMD processors, Competitive hardware pricing/vendors, error free connectivity to domains. Wait, that's three.

      You seem to have missed a vital part of the discussion. We were talking about how Apple artificially limits Macs to the detriment of Geeks. For the first two things you mention, not offering every product you want is not artificially limiting the products they do offer. For the last, I'm not sure I know what the hell you're talking about.

      Apple really hates geeks because of two reasons, 1. they ruin the image of the "cool" mac...

      Blah blah blah. Can you show me an example of Apple actions that demonstrate they are trying to get rid of geeks? Why the hell o they include a bash shell if they hate geeks? All you have is an opinion based upon your own feelings. Please actually support it with examples of decisions Apple has made to intentionally drive away geeks, as I supported my position with examples of things they've done to specifically cater to them. You make assertions that Apple is all about control, but I've shown a common threat that better fits their actual philosophy, and which does lead them to take tight control in some product lines. So please, enough speculation... please show some facts and examples.

    29. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better analogy: "You can have this free beer as long as you only drink it through a straw."

    30. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by mjwx · · Score: 1
      Apple's business model is about control end to end, that is the business model of the old mainframe companies, you have admitied this youreself.

      For the iPhone Apple tried to partner with several cell service providers before going with AT&T as the only one willing to make the concessions Apple needed for the level of functionality and ease of overall experience required.

      If you're too young to remember then please stop commenting. This may seem new to you but it's old news to us.

      You seem to have missed a vital part of the discussion.

      As have you, the choice of processor is a vital part of how apple limits geeks. Apple makes devices for people who dont want to know about how things work, hence the "just works" marketing. A geek on the other hand wants to learn.

      OS X has a lot of trouble connecting to Windows AD domains and Linux domains. If thats difficult for you to understand you are on the wrong web site.

      Can you show me an example of Apple actions that demonstrate they are trying to get rid of geeks?

      Go back and watch the "I'm a Mac ad's" where they vilify John Hodgeman (PC) and represent him as being the stereotypical geek.

      hy the hell o they include a bash shell if they hate geeks?

      Because Apple cant get rid of it. OS X is a clone of BSD with some proprietary overlaying techs meaning Apple have done little work on the BSD code and much of it is ripped from BSD licensed projects. So please, enough speculation... please show some facts and examples.

      Plenty of facts have been presented already, you simply dont wish to acknowledge them.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    31. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Antiocheian · · Score: 1

      Unless Apple is preventing NVidia from offering cards for the Mac, that doesn't apply.

      When you write "cards for the Mac" you mean "cards with special firmware to allow them to function on a Mac" since the hardware is the same, and this isn't about NVidia, it's about Apple restricting geeks who love upgrading hardware to a limited few options.

      And that was the topic, right?

    32. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Apple's business model is about control end to end, that is the business model of the old mainframe companies, you have admitied[sic] this youreself[sic].

      Sigh, I tried to be very clear, but you either are having problems with reading comprehension or you ignore anything that might contradict your already made up mind. Apple's business model is about polished and usable but limited technology being brought to the mass market from a niche. What I said was sometimes end to end control is the best way for Apple to achieve this and other times it is not, which is why "control" is not their core business model, but only appears that way to people who don't look across their product line.

      For the iPhone Apple tried to partner with several cell service providers before going with AT&T as the only one willing to make the concessions Apple needed for the level of functionality and ease of overall experience required.

      If you're too young to remember then please stop commenting. This may seem new to you but it's old news to us.

      What are you a simpleton? I'm describing their business model and giving examples as to how and why they don't always attempt to completely control their products. That absolutely relevant, but you don't want to hear it? Too freaking bad.

      You seem to have missed a vital part of the discussion.

      As have you, the choice of processor is a vital part of how apple limits geeks.

      Are you seriously making this argument? I guess that's how Sony limits geeks too. And how Lockheed limits geeks. Do you know that Lockheed doesn't sell a single desktop computer containing PPC processors? How dare they limit geeks.

      Either you're intentionally being obtuse and misunderstanding that the argument was about how companies and Apple artificially limit geeks in their products or you are a complete moron. Either way you've succeeded in convincing me discussion with you is pointless. I'm not even bothering to read, let alone comment upon the rest of your nonsense. Grow up already.

    33. Re:Apple Hates Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course Apple is full of geeks. They develop O/S's and design computer/phone hardware. That wasn't the point of the original post. The point was Apple doesnt like geek *CUSTOMERS* who create alternative OPTIONS to Apple's. Every sizeable tech company has many geeks working for them. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool.

      "It's funny because you did not provide even one example of how the PC provides more options than your Mac... something rather critical to your premise, no?"

      For a phone example, I have a Windows Mobile Phone and I can download any WinMobile app I want from anywhere on the internet, or download it on my PC and transfer via USB/Wireless, or I can write my own and load it on the phone. Can you do all that on the iPhone? I dont know what this "jailbreaking" fuss is all about. I guess the "jail" analogy flies over some peoples heads.

  30. Choice by Yaos · · Score: 1

    They took it down because it could give users of the application choice, Apple is all about not giving the user choice.

  31. Nonstory by MBCook · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a non-story. They weren't allowed to sell the app because it had BASIC. They snuck BASIC in, and Apple pulled it since they weren't allowed to sell it.

    This is not news.

    We don't need the "Apple should allow..." discussion. We had that 2 days ago when this was approved. And the last app that did something. And two before. And the next one.

    This isn't a story. "Apple does exactly what it said it would." Call CNN.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    1. Re:Nonstory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I can't believe this comment was modded up as 'Insightful'

      This is a non-story. They weren't allowed to sell the app because it had BASIC. They snuck BASIC in, and Apple pulled it since they weren't allowed to sell it.

      The story is WHY Apple didn't want the code that got "snuck in," not whether it was snuck in or even whether Apple followed through on what they failed to police after they'd made it an issue...

    2. Re:Nonstory by MBCook · · Score: 1

      We had that discussion. In fact, that story was posted just 26 hours before this one.

      We know Apple wouldn't let them do this. It's the same as it was when Apple first announced the rules for making applications. It's the same reason you can't sell Python. You can't let users program the phone. This is because Apple is careful, evil, protecting a sandbox, just a jerk, blah blah blah.

      We've had it all out before. We had it out 26 hours ago. This story wasn't useful. This is the kind of story that used to go into the quickies updates, because that's all it is, a one line update.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    3. Re:Nonstory by lennier · · Score: 1

      "We've had it all out before. We had it out 26 hours ago. This story wasn't useful."

      Bull.

      If any large organisation (Apple, Microsoft, the US Government, the USSR, whatever) is doing something deeply ETHICALLY WRONG, and they're still doing it, then no, we or anyone else haven't "had it all out" until they STOP doing it.

      That's basic Civics 101.

      I was frustrated with MoveOn.org's "Censure and Move On (tm)" campaign back in the Clinton era for this kind of thinking, I was frustrated when Bush W brought out that line when people opposed the Iraq War, and I'm still frustrated with it.

      If something wrong is happening YOU DO NOT "MOVE ON" FROM THAT ISSUE UNTIL IT GETS FIXED.

      That's why we will keep discussing this bad stuff until it stops being bad.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    4. Re:Nonstory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > y snuck BASIC in, and

      BASIC irom is needed by the games, as they call its math and io routines.

    5. Re:Nonstory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh bullshit. Let's change the headline to "Microsoft prevents C64 emulator from running on Zune." I guarantee you Apple fanboys would be the first persons posting about how awful and terrible Microsoft is, and how this would never happen in Apple's world.

      It's very much a story despite what you Apple fanatics think.

  32. When Apple made that 1984 commercial... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the giant head on the screen was their estimate of what Steve Jobs would look like in 2010 and the "woman" throwing the hammer is actually Linus Torvalds.

  33. Naughty Naughty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Naughty naughty Apple children, you have been misbehaving and Mommy and Daddy are going to have to take your shiny new toy away until you learn to behave. We are very disappointed and this is why you can't have nice things.

    Now run along, and don't think we don't know you have been reading those reviews of Android-based phones - we found the magazines under your bed. No you can't have an HTC Hero.

  34. Yes it is! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the specs:
            * Quad-band GSM EDGE 850/900/1800/1900
            * WCDMA 900/1700/2100 MHz

  35. BASIC Copyright issues? by cirby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Commodore's BASIC was licensed from Microsoft with a one-time fee. If I were Apple, I wouldn't let Microsoft BASIC anywhere NEAR this emulator until I got a signed legal document from Microsoft saying that the license covered all derivatives of the Commodore device, or that Apple had a free and clear right to use it.

    1. Re:BASIC Copyright issues? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Commodore's BASIC was licensed from Microsoft with a one-time fee."

      In perpetuity. The hardware that it runs on is irrelevant. There is no issue.

  36. Get a real smartphone. by argent · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you want a versatile, easy to use, high end phone, but don't want more than that, get an iPhone. If you want a real smartphone, get a real smartphone. If Apple doesn't want to sell a general purpose smart handheld, that's their prerogative. There's plenty of options right now.

    1. Re:Get a real smartphone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want a versatile, easy to use, high end phone, but don't want more than that, get an iPhone. If you want a real smartphone, get a real smartphone. If Apple doesn't want to sell a general purpose smart handheld, that's their prerogative. There's plenty of options right now.

      Or buy cheaper Nokia phone, compared to iphone they are equally ' high end'.

    2. Re:Get a real smartphone. by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Or buy a Palm Pre, which ALSO runs Linux and is much cheaper and hobby-friendly. Or an Android phone. Like he said, there are lots of options.

    3. Re:Get a real smartphone. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the options right now suck

  37. Fair Game by carvalhao · · Score: 0, Troll

    Actually I fail to see how this is not fair game. They set a standard which they are entitled to (sorry, if you don't like it, don't buy it, there are plenty of alternatives to iPhone and Apple hasn't really become a monopoly threat), the developers said they met the standard and the App was approved.

    Then, it turns out the App didn't meet the standard and was pulled. What's news about this except that if you're going to try to cheat... hey... DON'T POST ON THE INTERNET ABOUT IT.

  38. Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by Crash+Culligan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Really now, it's not like the iPhone is a closed black-box environment, for which no outsider can create software.

    However, in these modern times with object-oriented multithreaded programming, BASIC is kind of a throwback, don't you think? It may have been nice as the "gateway drug" of programming languages, but these days it's barely a first step.

    I'm not necessarily trying to defend Apple here; their decision to decline any app with programmability is still a curious, regrettable, and philosophically indefensible one. (Do symbolic environments count, like you'd find on a programmable calculator? What if that environment allowed the display of English text? What if the environment had English equivalents for some symbols?) But it is possible for people to buck the trend.

    --
    You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
    1. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just one on which no outsider can distribute software.

    2. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      in these modern times with object-oriented multithreaded programming, BASIC is kind of a throwback, don't you think?
       
      Why do you think that? BASIC is simple, straight-forward and relatively easy to learn. There are all kinds of "old-time" BASIC programmers around and lots of professional code has been written in BASIC over the years. A lot of programming (even today) involves simple string handling and reading/writing to a file; there's no requirement for fancy front-ends with lots of buttons for a lot of business- or system-oriented programming.
       
      I'm a big fan of BASIC, personally, and wish there was a really good console-oriented BASIC compiler or interpreter available for Linux.
       
      Yes, I know about Freebasic and Gambas but both of those are striving to be an object-oriented fancy thing that doesn't bear a lot of resemblance to traditional BASIC.
       
      Actually, BAS comes about the closest to my idea of what a BASIC interpreter should be. A few additional features like local variables, named subroutines and a $include directive to provide a simple Makefile-like capability would make it a real contender for serious BASIC programming on Linux. Sadly, the chap who wrote BAS doesn't seem to be too interested in that.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    3. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by lennier · · Score: 1

      "What if that environment allowed the display of English text? What if the environment had English equivalents for some symbols?"

      Like, for example, Inform 7?

      It would suck if Apple disallowed that.

      But hey, it's the GUI visual age! All pointy-clicky with the grunty. Wait, sorry, grunts aren't allowed, they could be interpreted as "language". Language bad, tree pretty.

      --
      You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
    4. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I realize I should probably just learn regular expressions more thoroughly and use Perl, but for a lot of things that I write very little shell scripts for, I wish I could use BASIC and things like LEFT$, MID$, RIGHT$.

      For very simple parsing of some files I get (maybe calculating an average of times spit out in a log line), I often do some 'cut's piped together to get the field out. While in this particular case, the BASIC wouldn't help, for other simple shell scripts, it would.

    5. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by bh_doc · · Score: 1

      Really now, it's not like the iPhone is a closed black-box environment, for which no outsider can create software.

      AFAICT, Apple demands that I register myself with them to access any development tools. I don't wish to do that. Thus, I am an outsider, and the iPhone appears as a closed black-box environment for which I cannot create software.

      It's still about control.

    6. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      For the job you mention here, BAS may meet your requirements.
       
      Over the past couple of weeks I have written a couple of small utilities and one-shot "get the data from X" things of that nature using BAS and it has worked well.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    7. Re:Did someone say "programmable platforms"? by dsmall · · Score: 1

      ...quote from parent

      "However, in these modern times with object-oriented multithreaded programming, BASIC is kind of a throwback, don't you think?"...

                I would say that different computer languages tend to have different strengths. People are different and they naturally gravitate to different languages, over the dead bodies of their teachers, but it remains true. Knowing several computer languages never hurt anyone. And I'll happily mention that BASIC really does have some strengths. No, I don't think Linux should be written in BASIC. But --

                I've found over time, that for me, BASIC can be really quite useful for whomping up little things, utilities that I need "Right Now, Just This Second". The syntax is friendly and easygoing, and it doesn't throw "avalanche fits". And if I mess up a line and something is wrong, figuring out what's wrong is not an exercise in puzzle solving, (not that I'm referring to "Macho C Coding" or anything [dark muttering] ).

                Basic's fast enough for a lot of things. And I should mention that XBASIC, over at Sourceforge, has an astonishing, superb compiler that makes very, very fast 80x86 code indeed. If you'd like a pleasant surprise, give it a try.

              I would say there's a place for BASIC. Don't underestimate the people how many people really like it. Possibly we should be dragging them, kicking, screaming, their fingernails digging into the wood, into C++ classes.

              But possibly BASIC is all they have time to learn, and all they really -want- to learn, about computers. They may be heathens, but they are also programmers.

              These are just my thoughts. Feel free to disagree with me; I welcome thoughts. I clearly learn the most from people who disagree with me!

              Thanks,

              David Small
      davetracer at-sign aol DOT com

               

  39. What would be cool would be... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

    ...a C64 SDK so that people could bundle up their favorite archived games or write their own to be included in the software library for this package.

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  40. I pulled the iPhone from my shopping cart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two can play that game...go Nokia!!!

  41. Y'all seem to fail to realize... by EkriirkE · · Score: 1

    The "No (non-native) interpreters" rule is so Apple can get more money out of developers (the $100 fee to develop on hardware/put in their store)
    The availability of basic opens doors for users to create games/utilities while bypassing the store and fees.
    This is why some of the emu games must re-package the emulator for each game (pack).

    --
    from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
  42. Cydia by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    I wish he would post it to Cydia

    1. Re:Cydia by mujadaddy · · Score: 1

      /sign (Work gave me an iPhone)

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
  43. POKE and Sandbox by mistapotta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I remember using PEEK and POKE to manipulate the memory on the C64. Is the emulator sufficiently sandboxed or could you use POKE outside of the conventional memory to brick^H^H^H^H^Hfree your iPod?

    1. Re:POKE and Sandbox by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I remember using PEEK and POKE to manipulate the memory on the C64. Is the emulator sufficiently sandboxed or could you use POKE outside of the conventional memory to brick^H^H^H^H^Hfree your iPod?

      Objective-C has raw pointers and pointer arithmetic already (since it's a strict superset of C), so there's nothing you could possibly do with this C64 thingy that you couldn't do with the (freely available) SDK, anyway.

      Besides, we've all heard that iPhone runs the "real OS X" - if so, it should have some, at least basic, notion of process boundaries, and trying to read and write random bytes in memory would give you SIGSEGV for the process that tries it, rather than root...

  44. Oh, iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can something so shiny be so anal-retentive?

    Or, Grime on the Mirror: The Petty World of iPhone Software

  45. It is quite simple by rahlquist · · Score: 1

    Allowing a command line like this would ruin your Iphone experience.

    Because Stevie Boy controls all aspects of your existences experience.

    --
    Sick of stupidity? http://www.patentlystupid.com
  46. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod parent up!

  47. App Store submission script by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    10 Submit $MYAPPLICATION
    20 GOTO 10

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  48. Anything interesting, by interval1066 · · Score: 1

    ...clever, useful, amusing, seems to be on Apple's kill list. Makes the famous 1984 ad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8 something less of a promise and more of a PALE LIE.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  49. Which phone instead? by tepples · · Score: 1

    If people don't like iPhones being locked down, they can effectively vote with their wallets and buy any number of other phones

    Which smartphones sold in the United States aren't locked down?

    1. Re:Which phone instead? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which smartphones sold in the United States aren't locked down?

      You mean what smartphones can you run arbitrary, unapproved software like emulators? Most of them. Blackberry, Linux, and Windows Mobile based phones almost all do that. There are, in fact, very few smartphones that don't, like the iPhone and a few new Android phones. One of the reasons the iPhone is so popular, however, is that it is restricted and that results in a better signal to noise ratio when trying to buy applications to run on it. The average person doesn't care if they can run a C64 emulator and those that do mostly only care about one that gets them to the classic games, not the Basic interpreter.

    2. Re:Which phone instead? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons the iPhone is so popular, however, is that it is restricted and that results in a better signal to noise ratio when trying to buy applications to run on it.

      No it doesn't.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  50. One Word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ZORK

  51. Apple does not hate geeks by snowwrestler · · Score: 1

    There is much about Apple's computer products that are very geek-friendly. For instance the OS X kernel is based on Unix and Mach and is open source. Portions of OS X are closed, making it less geek-friendly than Linux or BSD, but it is more geek-friendly than Windows. I can go tinker around in the core of the kernel if I want to.

    In addition Apple provides their full development environment--Xcode--with every single copy of their OS. That does not strike me as being anti-tinkering. My copy of Windows XP did not include Visual Studio. I'm no developer but I've fired up Xcode a few times and messed around for fun.

    Apple is much more restrictive on their phone platform than their computing platform. But even there, they have not gone after a single jail-breaker. They won't support it but they don't attack it. If I want to hack my own phone I am confident I'm not going to get sued or something.

    Where they are restrictive is in the officially supported SDK and distribution for the phone platform. They may think they have good reasons, but it is frustrating. But, I do not think it is fair to let that frustration escalate into a broad statements like "Apple hates geeks." There is a lot of ground between total freedom and "hate."

    --
    Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
  52. People realizing BASIC is better than Objective-C? by A12m0v · · Score: 1

    Or developing an iTunes-like app in BASIC? or maybe a VoiceOverIP client?

    Damn you Apple! and I say this as a happy iPhone 3G owner :-)

    --
    GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
  53. No no no by killmenow · · Score: 1

    It has nothing to do with that. And it really doesn't matter what reason Apple has. The point is moot because people IN POSSESSION of these phones don't actually OWN them, Apple does. Welcome to the iphOwn.

  54. If you want to program your iphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since apple pulled he C64 emulator because of basic, you can always download a HP15C emulator! it is programmable (with a wooping 400 programs steps or so!)

    and apple has not yet figured that one out :)

    cyrille

  55. Android? by A12m0v · · Score: 1

    I understand there are a lot of Android fans here, and I am one of them, but for Android to get anywhere it'll need better hardware. I played with my friend's T-Mobile G1, it is really good, but not as good as a first attempt as the iPhone.
    For the Android to be successful as the iPhone, Google needs to have more control over the hardware and not let everything to the handset makers, the software also needs some polish. Not as elegant of a UI as the iPhone, some UI responses don't feel as smooth as they should be. Safe to say, Android is better than Windows Mobile 6.1, and Microsoft has been trying for a decade or so!
    Will Android be dominant in years to come? probably so, but if it ever fails will be due to Google's lack of a vision of where to go with it and leaving it to the OEMs to decide. Part of what makes the iPhone works is the high integration between software and hardware, Android needs to follow suit without losing its openness and that would be Google's challenge.

    --
    GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    1. Re:Android? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't about the hardware, it's about the marketing. Apple has been selling hardware that costs more than the other brands do for a long time - because of clever marketing.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    2. Re:Android? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      No, it's not marketing. He didn't mention anything about marketing, he said he thought the iPhone currently works better.

    3. Re:Android? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      For the Android to be successful as the iPhone

      He was talking about the Android being as successful as the iPhone. Which will never happen by simply changing the hardware alone. The iPhone isn't the most powerful nor the most pretty phone on the market, but it is the best seller. (hint best selling phone = successful) Want to know why? Marketing.

      I know he didn't mention marketing, but it would be near impossible to have a real discussion about the iPhone's success without mentioning Apple's marketing campaign.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    4. Re:Android? by anagama · · Score: 1

      I don't think it is just marketing. My wife has an iPhone and the hardware feels nice, the UI is dead easy to figure out, and there are a lot of apps out there. For example, for $7 I bought her a nautical charting application that works with GPS features of the phone. Set some waypoints and now we can go straight to crab traps without hunting around at all.

      Fooling around with the myphone or whatever Tmobile is calling the 2nd gen phone didn't result in any nautical charting software in the marketplace. The myphone (or whatever it is called) felt pretty good physically, but not quite as nice as an iphone, though its dimensions were better -- I still think the iPhone seems kind of wide.

      If it wasn't for AT&T, I'd probably get one myself, and not because of marketing (I don't see TV anyway), but because the hardware is very nice and the app store has enough breadth that even niches are filled with quality apps.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    5. Re:Android? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and not because of marketing (I don't see TV anyway),

      Oh, the naïvity!

  56. C= a threat to Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So... the greatest threat to the iPhone operating system is.... Commodore Business Machines?
    Did I fall into a time warp and it's 1988 now?

  57. Did they license that BASIC interpreter? by Megane · · Score: 1

    After all, Commodore licensed it from Microsoft. That means that they either need to license it from (what's left of) Commodore, or Microsoft, or probably both since Commodore probably have their own I/O code in there. That's a better reason to pull it than "being an interpreter".

    It shouldn't be too hard to at least zero out the parts of the ROM that correspond to the BASIC interpreter, and only include 6502-code apps with it. Yes, they will probably have to hack a loader into every game to make up for the C64's lack of autoboot. But when there's no BASIC interpreter in there at all, there's no BASIC interpreter to break in to.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    1. Re:Did they license that BASIC interpreter? by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      It is not uncommon for C64 programs to use bits and pieces of the BASIC interpreter as though they were normal kernel services. The more you zero out, the more likely you are to introduce incompatibilities into your platform.

      BTW, licensing issues would also apply to the kernel ROMs and a bunch of other things, I'd think.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  58. So I was right! by erroneus · · Score: 1

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1360395&cid=29343587

    See this comment for my assumption regarding the BASIC interpreter. I knew they couldn't remove the interpreter without breaking compatibility.

  59. I still don't understand the rational by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Why the hell does apple care if i can run basic on a C64 emulator, or an Atari 800... I suppose they also ban any languages but their blessed ones? ( like python or java for example )

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  60. F-em by nurb432 · · Score: 0

    Its my device, i should be allowed to do whatever i please.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:F-em by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      And you can. Jail break it. End of story.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    2. Re:F-em by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't have to, it should support me doing what i want with it out of the box.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    3. Re:F-em by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      Why? Just because something has an engine and wheels doesn't mean it's freeway legal, or even street legal. They've built a product and they're selling it in a particular circumstance. You can modify it as much as you want, but they don't have to support that if they don't want to.

      Jailbreaking is simple, and even Woz does it. If you don't want to do that, don't buy the phone. Or if you do, quit yer whining.

      I have no great love of corporations, but they can sell whatever they want, as long as they don't make false claims about it. When the iPhone came out, they were clear that there were no 3rd party apps, no SDK, and people still flocked to the phone. They knew sales would go through the roof when they introduced the SDK, and they did, and that addressed the needs of 99% of people who would buy the thing. The rest can take two seconds and jailbreak it and give up their support until and unless they reset it to factory defaults. What's the big whoop?

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
  61. iPhone monoculture = virus target by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh yes, indeed. That is where this is all headed. iPhone viruses could be very powerful tools. Hmm I wonder what script interpreters will be used in the more sophisticated iPhone viruses/worms as they emerge. What kind of processor is in these? How many have they sold? Would it make a good distributed computing platform? They're begging to get hijacked one way or another. Not a good idea to alienate technical users from your tech product culture.

  62. Predicted this happening yesterday ... by BitZtream · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1360395&cid=29345727

    Way to go guys, you're so smart and quick that you're idiots.

    Interestingly enough, they sold an extra copy of it yesterday to me because, predicting this would happen, I wanted to get a copy before they took it down.

    I wouldn't have bought it otherwise, while its cool from a geek perspective, playing C64 games on a touch screen sucks a predictable amount of ass.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  63. why take the abuse? by miffo.swe · · Score: 1

    Instead of whining about Apple being a bunch of morons with world domination urges, get a better more free phone. At best the whining will bring a temporary change but the company culture itself is more or less set in stone. Control.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
    1. Re:why take the abuse? by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Already done that.

      But I'll criticise a story about a poor platform, just like everyone complains about Windows bugs and stupid actions from Microsoft or any other company round here. Why should Apple and the Iphone platform be held to any different standard?

      Plus maybe it'll be nice to have some more news coverage of the numerous other mobile phones available.

  64. Same as it ever was... by EriktheGreen · · Score: 1

    Apple's doing what they've done for years... limiting the amount of information and freedom they give to programmers and ordinary people who buy their products. For a long time when the Mac came out you couldn't "talk" to the hardware directly (or get any docs for it), you had to use hardware functions via the apple exposed and documented API, and apple would fight you creating and distributing any program that did otherwise. That's why I never bought a Mac... the interface was very good, much better for a long time than the PC/Windows interface, but the trade-offs in freedom weren't worth it.

    Same thing nowadays with the iPhone... you can get this neat phone with a super cool interface and great responsiveness... frankly it's a great product. But you can't do just anything you want with it, despite the fact you paid for it and now own it. You have to use the cell network provider apple approves, pay apple's prices, sell your app via Apple's store (okay, they may not require this, but they don't support easy sales any other way, so it's effectively a requirement) and follow apple's rules for acceptable application behavior.

    Sure, they can list semi-acceptable business reasons for wanting this kind of control (want to make sure apps all work/are high quality, want to make sure network connectivity is good, etc) but the real reason for the restrictions is the same one it's always been.

    Apple makes a lot of their money by exercising tight control over not just their products' design and software, but how they're sold and used... a level of control which, if most people were told about it up front, would make them very, very uncomfortable. But of course all you hear about up front is how cool the product is.

    So I'm still boycotting Apple products... which hurts sometimes because frankly they're pretty cool... Apple really broke the industrial design mold with iMac, and hasn't looked back.

    But Apple the corporation has always made a lot of money by taking away little bits of freedom here and there. It's amazing that otherwise intelligent geeks don't seem to recognize this nowadays... they've been doing this as long as Macs have been out. I guess it's more important to have a cool toy than to recognize that they're being taken for a ride by a large corporation.

    Apple... business as usual since 1984... and that's not a coincidence.

    Erik

    1. Re:Same as it ever was... by bennomatic · · Score: 1

      For a long time when the Mac came out you couldn't "talk" to the hardware directly

      Man, the last time I wanted to talk to the hardware directly was on a C64, appropriately enough. Why would you want to do that on a modern, multitasking system? Are you building some sort of dedicated control console for which the overhead of an OS/abstraction layer is not acceptable?

      Apple the corporation has always made a lot of money by taking away little bits of freedom here and there

      They wouldn't make any money doing that if there weren't some sort of trade-off. They make things easier and more reliable for people. If you don't build in some limits while you're doing that, you end up with a system that is prime host territory for viruses and trojans.

      Besides, as others have pointed out, they're not all evil. Want to develop for the Mac? Xcode and their docs are free as in beer. Want to develop for the iPhone? If you just want to do it yourself and only to your own phone, it's free. It's only if you want to distribute it to the general public that it costs anything.

      Don't forget: people choose the iPhone. They chose it even when there was no app store, no third-party development. The only reason this is an interesting topic of discussion is that it's the most popular phone out there. And with the cost of ownership, they're not exactly forcing anyone to buy...

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    2. Re:Same as it ever was... by EriktheGreen · · Score: 1

      Man, the last time I wanted to talk to the hardware directly was on a C64, appropriately enough. Why would you want to do that on a modern, multitasking system? Are you building some sort of dedicated control console for which the overhead of an OS/abstraction layer is not acceptable?

      So your justification for this is "you don't need that"? I can in fact think of plenty of cases where I'd like to talk directly to the underlying hardware... to get the most out of a given system, to replace firmware routines or BIOS with better software... But the main issue remains unchanged.. it's not whether I have an immediate need to do something, it's whether I'm *allowed* to use my own computer, which I've paid for, to do it, and publish my results.

      They wouldn't make any money doing that if there weren't some sort of trade-off.

      Yeah, if they didn't supply cool features people wouldn't accept their level of control :)

      They make things easier and more reliable for people. If you don't build in some limits while you're doing that, you end up with a system that is prime host territory for viruses and trojans.

      Um, no. Making things "easier and more reliable" has in fact the opposite effect... a "more reliable" system usually is also more resistant to malicious software than one less carefully engineered. Sorry, but I'm not buying Apple's explanation here. It's an excuse to justify their control.

      Besides, as others have pointed out, they're not all evil.

      I didn't say they were. Only Sith deal in absolutes.

      Want to develop for the Mac? Xcode and their docs are free as in beer. Want to develop for the iPhone? If you just want to do it yourself and only to your own phone, it's free. It's only if you want to distribute it to the general public that it costs anything.

      LOL... so I'm "free" to write and use whatever software I want, as long as I don't spread it around? Do you even understand how ridiculous that is? It's like a typewriter manufacturer dictating what kinds of books can be written using their machine. It's *mine*, I bought it, so I'll write what I want and do with it what I want, thank you.

      Don't forget: people choose the iPhone. They chose it even when there was no app store, no third-party development. The only reason this is an interesting topic of discussion is that it's the most popular phone out there. And with the cost of ownership, they're not exactly forcing anyone to buy...

      Forcing, no. That's the center of the ethical argument, actually. They aren't forcing people, they're just acting within the gray area of law and ethical behavior, holding out the shiny bauble with one hand to distract customers who aren't bright enough to watch the other hand carefully herding them away from things that "no one really needs to do"... things that coincidentally would threaten their profit margin. I see the shiny, and I like it, but I like freedom more, and I'm gonna wait and hope someday Apple either changes, or some more ethical corporation out-competes them... shiny things *with* freedom can't be beat.

      Erik

    3. Re:Same as it ever was... by bennomatic · · Score: 1
      The rest of your post was a little too tin-foil, but this part was interesting, so I'll comment:

      LOL... so I'm "free" to write and use whatever software I want, as long as I don't spread it around? Do you even understand how ridiculous that is? It's like a typewriter manufacturer dictating what kinds of books can be written using their machine. It's *mine*, I bought it, so I'll write what I want and do with it what I want, thank you.

      As the software author, you're free to write what you want and distribute it as you want. If you want to be on the official AppStore, you have to go through Apple. If you don't, then you have to convince people to whom you're selling software to jailbreak their phones.

      I don't think this is a legal or ethical grey area at all. They are absolutely clear and up-front about this, and anyone who doesn't know what they're getting into when they buy is blind, deaf and dumb, and even they can return the damn thing.

      I would take a different stance if they did something so that jailbreaking caused the thing to be irreparably bricked. But since it's so easy, and since their only level of enforcement at this time is to say, "Don't do it," it's up to owners to say, "Duly noted."

      To use a car metaphor, buy a VW Beetle and ask them if you can go off-roading with it. They'll tell you not to do it. If you say, "I'll get big shocks and knobby tires", they--and your insurance company--will tell you that it's not supported. If you do it anyway, and take it to a location where it's legal to do that kind of driving, VW's not going to stop you.

      Same thing here. Difference is that VW will actually void your warranty. With Apple, you can re-set to factory defaults and everything's still intact.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    4. Re:Same as it ever was... by EriktheGreen · · Score: 1

      LOL... so I'm "free" to write and use whatever software I want, as long as I don't spread it around? Do you even understand how ridiculous that is? It's like a typewriter manufacturer dictating what kinds of books can be written using their machine. It's *mine*, I bought it, so I'll write what I want and do with it what I want, thank you.

      To use a car metaphor, buy a VW Beetle and ask them if you can go off-roading with it. They'll tell you not to do it. If you say, "I'll get big shocks and knobby tires", they--and your insurance company--will tell you that it's not supported. If you do it anyway, and take it to a location where it's legal to do that kind of driving, VW's not going to stop you. Same thing here. Difference is that VW will actually void your warranty. With Apple, you can re-set to factory defaults and everything's still intact.

      This is kinda apples and oranges, but I'll go with it a bit.

      The difference between iPhone and VW is that Apple's not just dictating appropriate and safe use... if I wanted to use my iPhone as a pacemaker they'd be quite right to void my warranty and run screaming from the whole idea.

      What they're doing, though, is more like dictating what appropriate use is, apart from simply letting common sense and consumers decide.

      To use the VW analogy, it would be like VW requiring VW only gas to be used in their cars, which is more expensive and harder to get than non VW gas. Even though chemically identical and quite usable non-VW gas is out there, and some of it might offer more horsepower or cleaner emissions, VW would threaten to void your warranty if you used it and would verify use via an internal sensor in the gas tank.

      The thing that makes this behavior unacceptable isn't even the whole "VW only" rules and mechanisms described above, although it's a red flag to me. It's the reason VW would do it... to preserve their control of their cars and how they're used, because control means more profit for them from "VW Brand" gas and the ability to alter that fuel's composition or delivery mechanism as they see fit.

      Apple isn't trying to keep consumers safe or indicate which uses of its products will result in damage to them or injury. They're exercising a level of control over items no longer theirs that no manufacturer should have. It'd be different if they were up front and said something like "You're not buying your iPhone, you're just leasing it from us..." but they're not. They sell them.

      When I buy something, it's mine. So I'm going to show my disagreement with their behavior by not buying their products.

      Erik

  65. Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C64? by MoxFulder · · Score: 2, Informative

    Everyone on Slashdot seems to think the developer intentionally left an obvious, easy backdoor into the BASIC interpreter just to spite Apple.

    But here's what I'm wondering: is it actually possible to remove BASIC from the C64's ROM, and still be sure that games will run?

    If I recall correctly, the in-ROM BASIC interpreter provided a bunch of useful routines that you could access from machine code, and a lot of games and apps would call into these routines, or copy them elsewhere in memory, sometimes in ways that would seem horrifically non-portable and non-obvious today. It might be that it's just not really possible to excise the BASIC interpreter and still run a decent number of games.

    I haven't done much C64 in many years though. Can anyone fill us in on the technical feasibility of completely removing the BASIC interpreter?

  66. Not Allowed != Illegal by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 1

    I believe at least one of the problems is that with access to the basic interpreter could be used to start something that Apple hasn't controlled.

    There, fixed that for you.

    --
    I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
  67. Apple's Real Problem by istartedi · · Score: 1

    They started as the counter-culture, making "blue box" calls and screwing AT&T. Now they're the establishment; but they remember what it was like being on the other side. There's nothing quite so oppressive as a former revolutionary. The real excitement now is in making "blue box" calls charged to AT&T and Apple. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  68. Re: Over 2 years, you will have paid more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, actually, in the Netherlands, both the phone and the plan are cheaper. The 16GB iPhone 3GS with a 2-year â30/month plan is â100.

    Only major downside w.r.t. the AT&T situation is that 'nationwide' means less in the Netherlands.

    Upside is that T-mobile, the provider selling the iPhone in the Netherlands has some idea about what customer support means. For example, they recently complained to Apple when Apple rejected a third-party application that would allow viewing of recently broadcast TV programs over 3G.

  69. C64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But it's a C64 emulator... you could just write your own ROM, how is that any different than BASIC?

    1. Re:C64 by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      But it's a C64 emulator... you could just write your own ROM, how is that any different than BASIC?

      I don't think the emulator runs arbitrary, user supplied ROMs. My understanding was it would only run the ROMs supplied by Manomio through their server connection.

  70. The feared C64 becoming the new iPhobe API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Typo in my subject line, but I think I'll keep it.)

    This is exactly it. As perverse as it sounds, if they allow a C64 emulator, then C64 could become The new iPhone API. Or at least it would become the "best" one, in the sense that it would let people do with their computers whatever they want to do, even if it's ridiculously underpowered compared to the device's capabilities.

    On one hand, it's pretty hilarious that they'd feel threatened by that. On the other hand, you never know what stupid (?) idea might actually take off, so I guess they felt it would be best to nip it in the bud before anyone started using it for "real" apps.

  71. I understand your sentiment, but... by hellfire · · Score: 1

    ... the iPhone really does do more than a lot of Phones out there. It has way more apps than the Pre or Android, and can currently do more than either of them with these apps. There has been and continues to be a problem with Apple's approval process, along with the idea that Apple should even have an approval process, but claiming otherwise the iPhone is not a smart phone is simply karma whoring catering to iPhone haters.

    One day, if Apple doesn't fix this process, the Pre and Android will surpass them, but not yet. Being able to run background apps when there aren't enough apps worth running in the background doesn't count as a killer feature.

    The average iPhone user is not put out by the C64 emulator not being available and if they cry like babies for it, they should be slapped about. There's plenty more maintain their interest and far more important things than to rehash games from 20 years ago (oy why do you insist on reliving the past! OY! ;)).

    However, I really feel for the developers who are truly suffering here. Way too many apps are taking too long to be approved and are being rejected because Apple's secretive policies. How can you make money on a crap shoot of a policy? With tens of thousands of apps, any a rejection of say 1%, that's roughly hundreds of developers who keep getting rejected. To apple and the average user that's not much, but to a developer that's not something that can be relied on to sustain me if I can't get my apps out quickly.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:I understand your sentiment, but... by argent · · Score: 1

      It's got fewer apps than the previous generation of smartphones... whether they're using Symbian, Windows, or Palm OS. And it's not just the number of applications.

      * It's losing capability that was there in smartphones ten years ago. Nokia and Palm had general purpose smartphones last century, and Microsoft's partners followed within a few years.

      * It's losing the ability to run existing applications under simulation or emulation. I can run all my PalmOS applications under UAE... but not on an iPhone.

      Backing off on a core capability that were there in ten year old products is just critical, it really does put the iPhone in a new category... something less than a true smartphone. A smartphone is a general purpose handheld computer. If you can only run canned apps, either shipped with the phone or pulled in through a portal, it's not "smart". It's cool that it's made running applications on your phone popular, but it's less capable than what many of us have been using for a decade,

    2. Re:I understand your sentiment, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call me back when you can write a persistent applications for iPhone or replace Apple's apps. Then I'll buy you can do more with iPhone than you can do with me.

      -- Android

  72. Apple pulls software X from product Y by Trogre · · Score: 1

    And this, my friends is why I will never, ever own an iPhone. The ability to remotely disable software on a product you or I own is not acceptable.

    I'm sorry, it just isn't.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  73. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

    A lot of commercial C64 games were even written in C64 BASIC. The one that immediately springs to mind is Sword of Fargoal, published by Epyx, Inc, one of the biggest computer game publishers in the 80's, i.e. the age of the Commodore 64.
     
    If you removed BASIC from the C64, that game (and many others) couldn't possibly run.

    --
    If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  74. zekt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I read this article and then answered a call on my mobile phone. It was my phone company offering to renew my contract early for the same price and give me an iPhone.
    If they had have called 5 minutes earlier they would have got a "yes" as the answer.

  75. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by sparkeyjames · · Score: 1

    If you had a C64 and did any sort of programming on it you would know that the basic interpreter was just a rom mapped to a section of the under lying ram space. You could flip the basic interpreter rom image in or out as you saw fit by using assember code.

  76. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by sparkeyjames · · Score: 1

    "Assembler" code. IE the 6502 machine code.

  77. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

    Most games boot from Basic - so probably not without a lot of re-working the interpreter itself.

    Of course if you could boot games, you could always boot normal basic as well ;).

    I honestly think they don't like it because its a program that lets you run ad-hoc games from whoever for free, not because its a software platform.

  78. Still need a box by tepples · · Score: 1

    I only use [my SDTV] as a big external monitor when I want to watch videos or play games from my laptop

    But how many laptops have SDTV outputs? All I see lately are VGA and HDMI; one needs a converter box to scan-convert a VGA signal to NTSC S-Video. Besides, not a lot of major-label PC games are designed for a TV (e.g. large fonts, gamepad support), probably because not enough people have such converter boxes.

    and occasionally watch broadcast television.

    Unless the SDTV is from about 2006 or later, you still need a set-top box to turn an ATSC signal into NTSC S-Video.

  79. Apple doesn't want one other way to you create app by kvillaca · · Score: 1

    I particularly never bought and don't buy Apples products... they are very expensive, and not so better than any other similar, rather today the PCs are quite better then any Mac. Now have a strict control over any application isn't wise, because now there are one IPhone boom, but soon every mobile company will provide something like IPhone clones with many more resources and softwares and with accessible prices. I don't know why that everything from Apple is a big news, for my if they won't have many apps for your mobiles, because they can't have multi-task, it's problem for the person who bought one those, and more... I'm pretty sure that exist today many more market to sale mobile apps to Nokia and Blackberries than IPhone.

  80. What about Unity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your statement implies nothing with a language interpreter can ever be included.

    What about Unity? They support Unify, Boo and C# off the top of my head, which by the way, are all interpreted.

  81. one more reason to go android by iRideFreshies · · Score: 1

    This is just another reason why Android is going to take over the IPhone. The open system implemented by google will destroy mobile OSX in the not to distant future. 20(ish) handsets are coming out this year that can do so many things the I phone can not.

  82. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by mysidia · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking they could possibly patch the BASIC implementation to make sure the human cannot interact with it, rather than removing it entirely.

    There's some code in there responsible for reading line-oriented input into the program buffer..

  83. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by mysidia · · Score: 1

    As I understand it, the emulator app didnt let you just run any C64 ROM you want... only games you buy through the app itself (you get 5 games buying the app).

    Since you can't boot arbitrary files (You can only boot the C64 games you buy), you can't boot a BASIC image, since the authors of the app don't make a BASIC image available for purchase.

  84. PEEK POKE by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Apple probably doesn't like it because it will let you PEEK and POKE to the first 64KB of your iPhone's memory, and that's where Steve Jobs hides all of his best ideas.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:PEEK POKE by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      *POKE*

      Yes, sir!

      *POKE*

      Sir?

      *POKE*

      Sir!

      *POKE*

      Stop poking me!

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
  85. c64 emulator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    one word "applesoft" For each copy of microsoft (6502) basic that apple sells it's contracted to pay it's microsoft tax. apples first contract ran out late in the apple ]['s life time and apple had to sign a new contract with much higher rates apple sells commodore 64 emulator (with BASIC) == apple pays microsoft !!!

  86. this c64 emu? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  87. C64 had 3rd part basics available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could enable the ram under the basic, turn off the rom, and place your own basic there from a 3rd party that had better feature sets.

    Nothing stopping the emu guys from including that really.

    So there...

    Besides the MS basic has no commercial value and I doubt MS would sue, since they already got their money for it. Tho a pretty damn good effort
    for 8kb, i wonder how if that was rewritten in ASM for intel if it would beat java in execution speeds. Though a basic compiler would help to convert
    proper multi file function based code into 32bit line numbers.

  88. can't blame apple for this one manomio was warned by milkmage · · Score: 1

    meh. arrogant developers left BASIC in when it's a clear violation of the terms.

    this was on their blog, but it's gone now

    http://www.manomio.com/index.php/blog/c64_the_wait_is_over

    "We had agreed with Apple to remove basic from the application, but as we believed it would be possible to convince Apple to let it in later on, we left it in the app to be activated remotely by us when we had âoegoâ from Apple."

  89. This proves Apple is a religion by leighklotz · · Score: 1

    So Apple is afraid people are going to run programs in BASIC in a sandboxed virtual application emulating an 8-bit 6510 microproessor?
    There's just no justifiable reason for this. Except...religion. It's like religious dietary restrictions, which serve to remind the faithful that they are members of the tribe.

    Or maybe Apple just does it to keep the iPhone in the news, despite its lack of multi-processing, keyboard, or the freedom to install your own applications. Nah...it must be a religion.

  90. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by MoxFulder · · Score: 1

    If you had a C64 and did any sort of programming on it you would know that the basic interpreter was just a rom mapped to a section of the under lying ram space. You could flip the basic interpreter rom image in or out as you saw fit by using assember code.

    Yes, I did have a C64, did do some programming with it, and do know that the BASIC interpreter ROM could be mapped in and out of the 64k memory space.

    I'm not familiar with the code for any commercial programs... but I seem to recall having heard about lots of hacks that used routines in the BASIC ROM in lots of interesting ways... beyond just using it to boot.

    And this is why I wonder just how much of the BASIC ROM can be excised from the emulator without severely hurting game compatibility.

  91. Too much choice can make you unhappy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Options are the opposite of 'control'.

    For all of Apple's "Think Different" public image, the reality is that Apple encourages nothing of the sort: "Think Alike" is the mission.

    There is plenty of evidence around that too many options and too much choice leads to unhappiness. Good marketers understand this. The OSS community apparently does not. In the end some people make the decision to limit their choice and lead simpler less decision heavy lives. When I go to the super market I only buy bio/organic vegetables and fruit. One reason is the unscientific hypothesis that they may be better for you. The other is that actually my shopping options are narrowed and thus simpler. I move through the supermarket faster. Apple is a bit like bio vegies. It may or may not be better for you, as a computer experience, but the choices are made for you and then you can move on to better things in life. Not everybody cares if they can tweak the window manager or recode their kernel or install a C64 emulator for that matter. There will always be linux for that.

  92. Good example. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good example of why apple are right to vet software going into their app store, and in turn why apple gets more downloads a day than every linux repository combined.
    The app was rejected because it contains a major bug - which potentially leaves the user wondering wtf is going on. I personally think that a supplier imposing standards on the software that runs on their device is a fantastic thing for the consumer. And just to cut off another linux zealot kneejerk response, no I am not a mac fanboy, or anti-linux. My main os is Solaris10 (work) though I do use BackTrack4 and OSX at home.

  93. Jailbreak! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's crap like that, that led me to jailbreaking my ipodtouch within days of getting it. Yes I do want to be able to use my little wifi enabled computer as a computer AND have access to all the apps on Apples ap store, an ipod touch IS a universal Turing machine and I shall use it as such, and further no one will stop me unless they make interpreters just plain illegal in which case we have far bigger problems boys and girls: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

  94. Re:Is it even *possible* to remove BASIC from a C6 by clone53421 · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking they tried to do that, and didn't quite accomplish it. ;)

    Although that brings up a question. Why not just say that? I wonder... did they think "we thought it could be approved later, so we left it in" would go over better than "we couldn't take it out without breaking certain games, so we tried to disable it and didn't anticipate this exploit". The latter makes it sound like a security hole, so maybe they didn't want to put it in quite that light.

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.