Apple Revises iOS Developer Terms with Interpreted Code Support

| News

Apple’s policy that blocks the use of interpreted code in iPhone apps has been revised to allow for exceptions in specific and pre-approved situations. The new terms require written approval from Apple before using non-native iOS code in apps, and the code can only be used in limited situations.

The policy Apple recently imposed originally stated “No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple’s Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s).”

The revised version, however, offers a little more flexibility. “Unless otherwise approved by Apple in writing, no interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple’s Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, with Apple’s prior written consent, an Application may use embedded interpreted code in a limited way if such use is solely for providing minor features or functionality that are consistent with the intended and advertised purpose of the Application.”

Apple has been criticized by some groups for blocking interpreted code and cross-compilers from its iOS platform, most notably from people claiming the policy is a move to block Adobe Flash and Flash-based apps from the App Store.

While the policy change doesn’t open the door for iPhone apps that were originally coded with Adobe Flash, it does make it easier for game developers to take advantage of languages such as Lua (a common practice in the gaming industry) in their products.

[Thanks to Apple Outsider for the heads up.]

Comments

Intruder

Well, it’s a step. I know it won’t satisfy everybody, but it does show some willingness to change.

Tiger

Maybe it’s a bad thing to allow OS makers for devices to also “own” the ad platform for them as well. It certainly seems to have stirred up a hornets nest.

If Apple suddenly sold iAd, would the FTC reconsider the Google AdMob relationship and make them divest? Afterall, it was BECAUSE Apple had iAd that the AdMob sale was allowed to go through in the first place.

Maybe it’s time to unring a few bells.

good times

Apple has been criticized by some groups for blocking interpreted code and cross-compilers from its iOS platform, most notably from people claiming the policy is a move to block Adobe Flash and Flash-based apps from the App Store.

Adobe should file an in-writing request (and do so very publicly).

Wonder what Apple’s response would be.  Would Apple confirm the obvious, or would Apple be forced to capitulate?

Bosco (Brad Hutchings)

Adobe should do what it’s doing, which is focussing on platforms where they are wanted. One day, these silly games will catch up with Apple and they’ll want Adobe back.

I found a very interesting take on the App Store. Probably the best explanation I’ve seen to date.

http://whydoeseverythingsuck.com/2010/06/apple-fears-killer-app.html

Log-in to comment