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."

Comments

And then what?

[Jason daHaus]

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

Re:And then what?

[greenguy]

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.

Re:And then what?

[oldspewey]

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.

Re:And then what?

[dAzED1]

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.

Re:And then what?

[Froboz23]

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.

C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe

[bzzfzz]

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.

Re:C64 BASIC too powerful to be safe

[jpmorgan]

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?

Apple tries REALLY hard...

[IllForgetMyNickSoonA]

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!

Re:Apple tries REALLY hard...

[Ohio Calvinist]

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.

Apple is worse than Microsoft

[etymxris]

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.

You don't understand

[jpmorgan]

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.

Just Silliness

[Pitr]

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.

Re:Just Silliness

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

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.

Re:Because......

[Danathar]

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

Re:The n900 cometh...

[ShadowRangerRIT]

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.

Apple Hates Geeks

[popo]

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.

Re:Apple Hates Geeks

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

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?

Nonstory

[MBCook]

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.

Re:What a dumbass

[Renderer of Evil]

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.

Get a real smartphone.

[argent]

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.

Re:The n900 cometh...

[whisper_jeff]

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'.