5 ms·

iPhone apps with Unity or LUA

90 points by illumin8 17y ago

Zarathust 17y ago
There are about 150 apps listed in that spreadsheet, it doesn't look like much to me. I agree that development restrictions are bad, but is there all that uproar for a few hundred apps only?
jasonlotito 17y ago
Thank Jobs we are cleaning out all those garbage games. They should have used Apple's clearly superior game dev framework.
- seiji 17y ago
  Let's check in with reality for a minute. I know it's fun to rage rage rage when you're potentially slighted, but nothing has happened yet. Nothing at all. Nothing except hundreds (thousands?) of people whining online. Apple changed language in their dev agreement for an unreleased platform. They have the right to selectively enforce the agreement at their leisure. I don't see them deciding to drop cross platform game engines. I see them targeting Flash/actionscript to ARM translation (made possible by Apple's own LLVM, by the way) from being distributed in the official store. How can we harness the creativity and energy put in to empty internet rage rage rage into something useful?
  - biafra 17y ago
    >I don't see them deciding to drop cross platform game engines. Would you bet your company on this? The wording of section 3.3.1 could not be more clear on what will be tolerated and what not.
    - wallflower 17y ago
      In many cases, the game has already been developed. What can they do but wait and see what actions Apple takes to enforce?
      - bond 17y ago
        What about updates?...
        pygy_ 17y ago
        Good point, I remeber reading about a game, initially accepted, that had been pulled out because it relied on a library that was able to call private APIs, even though the game didn't use that part of the library. This happened when Apple started to scan binaries for infringing code.
        wallflower 17y ago
        Apple's precedent seems to be pull the games immediately from the AppStore and not wait for an update. That being said, it would be extremely strange in a corporate sense to see a fair number of top grossing apps disappear.
        bond 17y ago
        Since the apps were approved by the previous terms they still can be sold, i guess... Now if the developer submits an update then it must comply with the new terms...
        wvenable 17y ago
        Approved apps have been pulled before (Google Voice apps) so they could do it. I doubt they would, but it's not without precedent.
        cakesy 17y ago
        No, that is wrong. I have had occasion where Apple have not allowed me to submit an update, because they object to some perceived trademarked data, which is also present in the last version. But they have left up the last version.
    - dustingetz 17y ago
      its probably a good bet, apple's intentions are pretty clear and nixing studio-quality game engines is not to their advantage.
      - dandelany 17y ago
        No. It's undoubtedly a bad bet to put your time and energy into creating a product that is in direct violation of the policies of the store in which you plan to sell the product. I'm not saying they will definitely ban you, I'm saying the risk of putting all your eggs in the Unity or Lua basket and getting banned vastly outweighs the potential reward of a lucrative app.
    - dazzawazza 17y ago
      I think a careful implementation of Lua integration 'avoids' 3.3.1 but 3.3.2 which forbids interpreted languages (except those within the official SDK) catches it.
      - olefoo 17y ago
        From what I've seen, the ban on interpreters is very much aimed at options that allow an end user to download and run scripts and if that is the case, expect Apple to clarify that, particularly if they are getting pushback from the larger grossing game houses. The ostensible reason for the ban on interpreters is that allowing third party scripts would be a security risk; which is true to a point. But, we all know that it functions to keep the App Store as the only source of software.
        WildUtah 17y ago
        /the ban on interpreters is very much aimed at options that allow an end user to download and run scripts/ That's why 3.3.2 used to prohibit only apps that download and run scripts. Now it prohibits apps that download or run scripts. So that should take care of those folks polluting the iPhone with the Lua.
      - jcl 17y ago
        I don't understand how that could be... Could you explain? If a portion of your app is written in Lua, how can you claim that the app is "originally written" in a C derivative?
        dazzawazza 17y ago
        It's a technicality of course but you can rightly claim that the app is written in C and that it interprets the Lua code. In the same way it may interpret and XML file. Of course we all know this is a technicality and it doesn't matter since 3.3.2 states "... No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application...". The two clauses combine to put Lua on a sticky wicket. Certainly for video games it's not as if there is a slim C layer and the vast bulk is written in Lua. Most game engines are huge and only game flow and AI are written in Lua.
  - jasonlotito 17y ago
    I'll upvote you because your asking me to validate my point, and I'll also answer. The "rage" does serve a purpose. First, it's a sign to others who would do the same thing that Apple is doing, that we don't like it. If we didn't say anything, others might assume it's accepted, and do the same thing. This would be harmful. Secondly, if this "rage" is loud enough, it might make Apple change their mind, or come to some compromise. While this wouldn't solve the problem, nor would people forget (two reasons I don't think Apple will change this), it would force Apple to recognize the folly of it's ways. Apple is focused on the user experience, and in this case, the user is the developer. Next, their intent is not the same as their actions. "I don't see them deciding to drop cross platform game engines." But they are. And it's not the official store. It's the only store. You make the mistake of thinking that "rage" is itself useless. I'll agree it might not seem like anything gets accomplished, but it at least gets the issue out there. Lots of "rage-less" discussion has occurred, and much of it, I believe, a result of reason rising above the general rage, and exists because there was rage to begin with. Finally, something has happened. You say it's "changed language in their dev agreement for an unreleased platform." But when should people complain? After it's released? No, the time to complain is when it's previewed. At least then something can be done about it. Before it get's released.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
  - TallGuyShort 17y ago
    Yeah, nothing's happened, but they just threw my several months worth of work and a lot of what I've told my investors into serious jeopardy. If they hold to this strictly, I'm going to have to put a lot of work just into making an iPhone app that integrates with the rest of my system, or do without altogether. Apple clearly didn't take that into account, so if I see a situation in which this backfires on Apple, I plan on laughing. Loudly.
armandososa 17y ago
Final Fantasy --> "Contains a "ff1psp" ROM file" Ha! That make me laugh
FraaJad 17y ago
Lua is not an acronym.
- frou_dh 17y ago
  Lua Unbeknownst Acronym
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
iamcalledrob 17y ago
There are some real premium titles in this list. This really is Apple turning against its self. Rolando is a particular shocker, because the developerss, ngmoco, are funded by the Apple-endorsed iFund.
- bmalicoat 17y ago
  I don't think the games listed are shocking, the shocking part is either Apple don't realize how big games are made or they don't care.
- ugh 17y ago
  Tap Tap Revenge was featured in many ads from Apple and – get this – they used it to demonstrate Multitasking last thursday (at the iPhone OS 4 sneak peak event).
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
pyman 17y ago
Shocking. The Unity3D guys were runner-up in the Best OS X Graphics category in the 2006 Apple Design Awards.
- drawkbox 17y ago
  They were a solely Mac and then iPhone shop until they branched out to Windows support for their IDE just last year. Recently they also announced using unity on Android, PS3, XBOX360 and more to come. They already supported exports to desktop (Mac and PC), web player (all browsers) and widgets. I imagine that their recent news about cross platform can't have helped their favor. But many flash devs bought a Mac and started doing iPhone dev simply for Unity 3D. I am a game developer and bought a Macbook Pro just to use Unity 3d before when it was a Mac only IDE. I also bought an iMac later and many touches and iPhones. Unity might be solely responsible for making me a Mac user to start since 2006-7 (intel based and being nix rooted with the best nix GUI ever as well maybe). Sad that Apple doesn't see that much. Many, many, many game devs bought a Mac solely based on Unity.
andreyf 17y ago
Flagged for being misleading. Apple has given no indication they are targeting Unity3D apps for removal. As this list points out, it would be very foolish to. Their SDK EULA only applies to the SDK software, not to any other compilers, and using it as a "heuristic" for what will or won't be accepted to the AppStore is completely at their discretion. Ouside of the Hacker News top stories, this is pretty common knowledge, see: We've heard directly from Unity Technologies themselves, and the company's CEO, David Helgason, has been in contact with Apple over the matter. Helgason says that so far Unity has "no indication from Apple that things are going to change." This is consistent with John Gruber's viewpoint on the new iPhone OS 4.0 dev agreement. Gruber originally thought that Unity3D would be a prime candidate for banning under the new rules, but given that Unity3D is, in Gruber's words, "a pre-processor than a cross-compiler," it's nowhere near as certain that Unity will fall on what Gruber calls "the wrong side of the line" per the new dev agreement. Source: http://www.tuaw.com/2010/04/08/iphone-os-4-0-dev-agreement-blocks-using-flash-or-unity-as-ides/4 http://www.tuaw.com/2010/04/08/iphone-os-4-0-dev-agreement-b...
- tomh- 17y ago
  From what I know their TOS applies to everything which is posted to the Appstore. As hundreds of people already pointed out by the wording of the TOS, both Unity3d and Flash are in violation of it. It doesn't matter if Unity is a pre-processor or cross-compiler or whatever, the apps are not _originally_ written in objective-c, c++ or c. This is the official response regarding their contact with apple: "We haven’t heard anything from Apple about this affecting us, and we believe that with hundreds of titles (or probably over a thousand by now), including a significant proportion of the best selling ones, we’re adding so much value to the iPhone ecosystem that Apple can’t possibly want to shut that down. Our current best guess is that we’ll be fine. But it would obviously be irresponsible to guarantee that. What I can guarantee is that we’ll continue to do everything in our power to make this work, and that we will be here to inform you when we know more – as soon as we know more." source: http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/04/10/unity-and-the-iphone-os-4-0/ http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/04/10/unity-and-the-iphone-os-...
  - andreyf 17y ago
itistoday 17y ago
We're sorry, ----@gmail.com does not have permission to access this spreadsheet. Anyone else getting this? What's the deal? Did anyone get a chance to save it?
- cheald 17y ago
  Yeah, it seems the sheet was just protected. Why?
  - confuzatron 17y ago
    It's a consequence of the high number of requests for the doc. It started working for me after a short wait. Edit: hmm... or maybe when this happens it's because the owner is temporarily taking the the document offline to fix it when people mess it up?
    - cheald 17y ago
      Interesting. I wonder why Google throttles it like that.
      - hy3lxs 17y ago
        Because editing google doc spreadsheets isn't sharded.
- samratjp 17y ago
  Same here.
confuzatron 17y ago
I really enjoyed Rolando - lovely game. So I'm dismayed to now realise that it has bad performance due to not being written in Objective-C, and the Layers and the APIs and the crappy User Experience and the Glavin! It seemed really good to me, but I guess I wasn't paying attention. It just shows how insidious these fake apps can be - they have poor performance but in a way that is indistinguishable from a Correct application. I'll be emailing Apple ASAP to apologise for being so easily fooled.
blasdel 17y ago
The obvious thing would be for Apple to just include Lua with the operating system. They could even fund a port of LuaJIT to ARM (it's the fastest general-purpose script interpreter on x86)
- ryanpetrich 17y ago
  JIT compilation is not only forbidden, it's not possible without jailbreaking (once a page is writable, it can't be made executable)
  - blasdel 17y ago
    My point was that Apple should do it. They've been shipping JIT in JavascriptCore on ARM for a year now.
    - ryanpetrich 17y ago
      I agree. That would require Apple loosening the noose though (which seems unlikely)
ErrantX 17y ago
How many of these are good apps? I haven't played most of the games so have no personal experience - a lot of the titles look solid though. Personally I think we should wait and see what Apple does to impose these new rules. It's very easy to get excited about how the world is ending for unity et al but the proof is really in the pudding. I have a suspicion unity in general will be ok. But Apple will use this to remove "duff" apps at their discretion. Not that that is a great situation.
- pyre 17y ago
  It's akin to marking everyone as a criminal so that you can selectively enforce the law whenever someone upsets you...

90 points by illumin8 17y ago

There are about 150 apps listed in that spreadsheet, it doesn't look like much to me. I agree that development restrictions are bad, but is there all that uproar for a few hundred apps only?

jasonlotito 17y ago

Thank Jobs we are cleaning out all those garbage games. They should have used Apple's clearly superior game dev framework.

seiji 17y ago
Let's check in with reality for a minute. I know it's fun to rage rage rage when you're potentially slighted, but nothing has happened yet. Nothing at all. Nothing except hundreds (thousands?) of people whining online. Apple changed language in their dev agreement for an unreleased platform. They have the right to selectively enforce the agreement at their leisure. I don't see them deciding to drop cross platform game engines. I see them targeting Flash/actionscript to ARM translation (made possible by Apple's own LLVM, by the way) from being distributed in the official store. How can we harness the creativity and energy put in to empty internet rage rage rage into something useful?
- biafra 17y ago
  >I don't see them deciding to drop cross platform game engines. Would you bet your company on this? The wording of section 3.3.1 could not be more clear on what will be tolerated and what not.
  - wallflower 17y ago
    In many cases, the game has already been developed. What can they do but wait and see what actions Apple takes to enforce?
    - bond 17y ago
      What about updates?...
      - pygy_ 17y ago
        Good point, I remeber reading about a game, initially accepted, that had been pulled out because it relied on a library that was able to call private APIs, even though the game didn't use that part of the library. This happened when Apple started to scan binaries for infringing code.
      - wallflower 17y ago
        Apple's precedent seems to be pull the games immediately from the AppStore and not wait for an update. That being said, it would be extremely strange in a corporate sense to see a fair number of top grossing apps disappear.
        bond 17y ago
        Since the apps were approved by the previous terms they still can be sold, i guess... Now if the developer submits an update then it must comply with the new terms...
        wvenable 17y ago
        Approved apps have been pulled before (Google Voice apps) so they could do it. I doubt they would, but it's not without precedent.
        cakesy 17y ago
        No, that is wrong. I have had occasion where Apple have not allowed me to submit an update, because they object to some perceived trademarked data, which is also present in the last version. But they have left up the last version.
  - dustingetz 17y ago
    its probably a good bet, apple's intentions are pretty clear and nixing studio-quality game engines is not to their advantage.
    - dandelany 17y ago
      No. It's undoubtedly a bad bet to put your time and energy into creating a product that is in direct violation of the policies of the store in which you plan to sell the product. I'm not saying they will definitely ban you, I'm saying the risk of putting all your eggs in the Unity or Lua basket and getting banned vastly outweighs the potential reward of a lucrative app.
  - dazzawazza 17y ago
    I think a careful implementation of Lua integration 'avoids' 3.3.1 but 3.3.2 which forbids interpreted languages (except those within the official SDK) catches it.
    - olefoo 17y ago
      From what I've seen, the ban on interpreters is very much aimed at options that allow an end user to download and run scripts and if that is the case, expect Apple to clarify that, particularly if they are getting pushback from the larger grossing game houses. The ostensible reason for the ban on interpreters is that allowing third party scripts would be a security risk; which is true to a point. But, we all know that it functions to keep the App Store as the only source of software.
      - WildUtah 17y ago
        /the ban on interpreters is very much aimed at options that allow an end user to download and run scripts/ That's why 3.3.2 used to prohibit only apps that download and run scripts. Now it prohibits apps that download or run scripts. So that should take care of those folks polluting the iPhone with the Lua.
    - jcl 17y ago
      I don't understand how that could be... Could you explain? If a portion of your app is written in Lua, how can you claim that the app is "originally written" in a C derivative?
      - dazzawazza 17y ago
        It's a technicality of course but you can rightly claim that the app is written in C and that it interprets the Lua code. In the same way it may interpret and XML file. Of course we all know this is a technicality and it doesn't matter since 3.3.2 states "... No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application...". The two clauses combine to put Lua on a sticky wicket. Certainly for video games it's not as if there is a slim C layer and the vast bulk is written in Lua. Most game engines are huge and only game flow and AI are written in Lua.
- jasonlotito 17y ago
  I'll upvote you because your asking me to validate my point, and I'll also answer. The "rage" does serve a purpose. First, it's a sign to others who would do the same thing that Apple is doing, that we don't like it. If we didn't say anything, others might assume it's accepted, and do the same thing. This would be harmful. Secondly, if this "rage" is loud enough, it might make Apple change their mind, or come to some compromise. While this wouldn't solve the problem, nor would people forget (two reasons I don't think Apple will change this), it would force Apple to recognize the folly of it's ways. Apple is focused on the user experience, and in this case, the user is the developer. Next, their intent is not the same as their actions. "I don't see them deciding to drop cross platform game engines." But they are. And it's not the official store. It's the only store. You make the mistake of thinking that "rage" is itself useless. I'll agree it might not seem like anything gets accomplished, but it at least gets the issue out there. Lots of "rage-less" discussion has occurred, and much of it, I believe, a result of reason rising above the general rage, and exists because there was rage to begin with. Finally, something has happened. You say it's "changed language in their dev agreement for an unreleased platform." But when should people complain? After it's released? No, the time to complain is when it's previewed. At least then something can be done about it. Before it get's released.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
- TallGuyShort 17y ago
  Yeah, nothing's happened, but they just threw my several months worth of work and a lot of what I've told my investors into serious jeopardy. If they hold to this strictly, I'm going to have to put a lot of work just into making an iPhone app that integrates with the rest of my system, or do without altogether. Apple clearly didn't take that into account, so if I see a situation in which this backfires on Apple, I plan on laughing. Loudly.

armandososa 17y ago

Final Fantasy --> "Contains a "ff1psp" ROM file" Ha! That make me laugh

FraaJad 17y ago

Lua is not an acronym.

frou_dh 17y ago
Lua Unbeknownst Acronym
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

iamcalledrob 17y ago

There are some real premium titles in this list. This really is Apple turning against its self. Rolando is a particular shocker, because the developerss, ngmoco, are funded by the Apple-endorsed iFund.

bmalicoat 17y ago
I don't think the games listed are shocking, the shocking part is either Apple don't realize how big games are made or they don't care.
ugh 17y ago
Tap Tap Revenge was featured in many ads from Apple and – get this – they used it to demonstrate Multitasking last thursday (at the iPhone OS 4 sneak peak event).

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

pyman 17y ago

Shocking. The Unity3D guys were runner-up in the Best OS X Graphics category in the 2006 Apple Design Awards.

drawkbox 17y ago
They were a solely Mac and then iPhone shop until they branched out to Windows support for their IDE just last year. Recently they also announced using unity on Android, PS3, XBOX360 and more to come. They already supported exports to desktop (Mac and PC), web player (all browsers) and widgets. I imagine that their recent news about cross platform can't have helped their favor. But many flash devs bought a Mac and started doing iPhone dev simply for Unity 3D. I am a game developer and bought a Macbook Pro just to use Unity 3d before when it was a Mac only IDE. I also bought an iMac later and many touches and iPhones. Unity might be solely responsible for making me a Mac user to start since 2006-7 (intel based and being nix rooted with the best nix GUI ever as well maybe). Sad that Apple doesn't see that much. Many, many, many game devs bought a Mac solely based on Unity.

andreyf 17y ago

Flagged for being misleading. Apple has given no indication they are targeting Unity3D apps for removal. As this list points out, it would be very foolish to. Their SDK EULA only applies to the SDK software, not to any other compilers, and using it as a "heuristic" for what will or won't be accepted to the AppStore is completely at their discretion. Ouside of the Hacker News top stories, this is pretty common knowledge, see: We've heard directly from Unity Technologies themselves, and the company's CEO, David Helgason, has been in contact with Apple over the matter. Helgason says that so far Unity has "no indication from Apple that things are going to change." This is consistent with John Gruber's viewpoint on the new iPhone OS 4.0 dev agreement. Gruber originally thought that Unity3D would be a prime candidate for banning under the new rules, but given that Unity3D is, in Gruber's words, "a pre-processor than a cross-compiler," it's nowhere near as certain that Unity will fall on what Gruber calls "the wrong side of the line" per the new dev agreement. Source: http://www.tuaw.com/2010/04/08/iphone-os-4-0-dev-agreement-blocks-using-flash-or-unity-as-ides/4 http://www.tuaw.com/2010/04/08/iphone-os-4-0-dev-agreement-b...

tomh- 17y ago
From what I know their TOS applies to everything which is posted to the Appstore. As hundreds of people already pointed out by the wording of the TOS, both Unity3d and Flash are in violation of it. It doesn't matter if Unity is a pre-processor or cross-compiler or whatever, the apps are not _originally_ written in objective-c, c++ or c. This is the official response regarding their contact with apple: "We haven’t heard anything from Apple about this affecting us, and we believe that with hundreds of titles (or probably over a thousand by now), including a significant proportion of the best selling ones, we’re adding so much value to the iPhone ecosystem that Apple can’t possibly want to shut that down. Our current best guess is that we’ll be fine. But it would obviously be irresponsible to guarantee that. What I can guarantee is that we’ll continue to do everything in our power to make this work, and that we will be here to inform you when we know more – as soon as we know more." source: http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/04/10/unity-and-the-iphone-os-4-0/ http://blogs.unity3d.com/2010/04/10/unity-and-the-iphone-os-...
- andreyf 17y ago

itistoday 17y ago

We're sorry, ----@gmail.com does not have permission to access this spreadsheet. Anyone else getting this? What's the deal? Did anyone get a chance to save it?

cheald 17y ago
Yeah, it seems the sheet was just protected. Why?
- confuzatron 17y ago
  It's a consequence of the high number of requests for the doc. It started working for me after a short wait. Edit: hmm... or maybe when this happens it's because the owner is temporarily taking the the document offline to fix it when people mess it up?
  - cheald 17y ago
    Interesting. I wonder why Google throttles it like that.
    - hy3lxs 17y ago
      Because editing google doc spreadsheets isn't sharded.
samratjp 17y ago
Same here.

confuzatron 17y ago

I really enjoyed Rolando - lovely game. So I'm dismayed to now realise that it has bad performance due to not being written in Objective-C, and the Layers and the APIs and the crappy User Experience and the Glavin! It seemed really good to me, but I guess I wasn't paying attention. It just shows how insidious these fake apps can be - they have poor performance but in a way that is indistinguishable from a Correct application. I'll be emailing Apple ASAP to apologise for being so easily fooled.

blasdel 17y ago

The obvious thing would be for Apple to just include Lua with the operating system. They could even fund a port of LuaJIT to ARM (it's the fastest general-purpose script interpreter on x86)

ryanpetrich 17y ago
JIT compilation is not only forbidden, it's not possible without jailbreaking (once a page is writable, it can't be made executable)
- blasdel 17y ago
  My point was that Apple should do it. They've been shipping JIT in JavascriptCore on ARM for a year now.
  - ryanpetrich 17y ago
    I agree. That would require Apple loosening the noose though (which seems unlikely)

ErrantX 17y ago

How many of these are good apps? I haven't played most of the games so have no personal experience - a lot of the titles look solid though. Personally I think we should wait and see what Apple does to impose these new rules. It's very easy to get excited about how the world is ending for unity et al but the proof is really in the pudding. I have a suspicion unity in general will be ok. But Apple will use this to remove "duff" apps at their discretion. Not that that is a great situation.

pyre 17y ago
It's akin to marking everyone as a criminal so that you can selectively enforce the law whenever someone upsets you...