4 ms·

From the article: "Why? Discussion on the Scratch forums suggests that it’s because Apple wants to focus on consuming media using these devices, not producing

From the article: "Why? Discussion on the Scratch forums suggests that it’s because Apple wants to focus on consuming media using these devices, not producing media. Want to be truly computing literate, where you write as well as read? There’s no app for that." No, it's because (as far as I can tell) the Scratch iPhone app was acting as a Scratch interpreter which is explicitly not allowed on the App Store to begin with. The authors of the iPhone app (http://www.mobilewikiserver.com/Scratch.html http://www.mobilewikiserver.com/Scratch.html) made a nice post in the developer forums (https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425 https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425) pleading their case for any you with access to the forum and an interest in digging deeper.

aristoxenus 16y ago
That post really puts the "C/C++/Obj-C" thing into much starker relief than the "wish I could use lisp" discussion. Geeks can get around 3.3.1 if they're clever enough; replacing a democratizing technology like Scratch, on the other hand, may be impossible. That said, if their app really was an interpreter, I'm surprised it made it into the store in the first place. And if anything, the typical Scratch output of a crayon-drawn animation designed by a 13-year-old only bolsters Jobs' point about cross-compilers bringing down the average app quality. But I'm very impressed that they had Scratch working on the platform and I hope Apple can find a way to incorporate that educational mission into their world-domination strategy...
- stcredzero 16y ago
  They built it on top of Squeak. That thing is one of the most straightforward VMs to port. The runtimes execute bit-identical. Years ago they were on 40 different platforms, and I've lost track. It's an incredibly elegant architecture.
  - aristoxenus 16y ago
    That's cool. Should have said "happy" instead of "impressed" -- knowing nothing about the technical side, I was imagining the impact of letting kids program ipods/iphones. They must have loved that.
  - jfoutz 16y ago
    One javascript implementation is the lively kernel, here http://www.lively-kernel.org/ http://www.lively-kernel.org/ I'd bet there are others.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - astine 16y ago
    This app would've been rejected even before the changes to 3.3.1. It wasn't rejected. It made it into the store and was removed later.
    - aristoxenus 16y ago
      Unfortunately, that in itself is fairly common (gets past one reviewer but rejected/removed much later by another).
cesare 16y ago
"No, it's because (as far as I can tell) the Scratch iPhone app was acting as a Scratch interpreter which is explicitly not allowed on the App Store to begin with." Which goes to show, once again, that this policy is really stupid and that it doesn't affect exclusively developers, but also the educational potential so vehemently touted by all the iPad/iPhone/iTouch fans.
ajg1977 16y ago
So I imagine Apple will soon be taking down the Secret of Money Island and the Sim games, since I know for a fact both of these use interpreters. No, of course they won't. Because those titles bring in big bucks and are from the types of developer Apple wants to develop for their device. It the capricious and selective enforcement of the SDKs T&Cs that is the biggest problem for developers. It's not that Apple are against interpreters, they are just against interpreters when it is not financially beneficial to them.
- wvenable 16y ago
  Actually they fully allow interpreters as long as it doesn't allow users to run arbitrary code. They allowed the Commodore 64 emulator once direct access to the BASIC interpreter was removed: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/10/iphone-commodore-64-emulator-back-on-the-app-store/ http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/10/iphone-commodore-64-emulat... Of course, all these products were put into the app store before rule 3.3.1.
  - wrs 16y ago
    Let's keep it accurate -- that's rule 3.3.2: "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)." When the C64 emulator was released, that "or" was an "and". Now they don't allow non-Apple interpreters at all. (Unless they feel like it.)
stcredzero 16y ago
It should be possible to create a Scratch execution environment on top of Javascript/Safari. A cross compiler done correctly might run faster than the "native" Squeak VM.
- icey 16y ago
  Do you know if anyone has built anything non-trivial with Clamato? (http://clamato.net/ http://clamato.net/)
  - avibryant 16y ago
    I've certainly built stuff with it that is useful, and some if it is even production, but none of it as complex as, say, the Clamato environment itself. I don't know of anyone else who has.
- rubinelli 16y ago
  But then the program is still not originally written in JavaScript, so no dice. I think a subset of JavaScript plus a nice library would be ok, though.
  - jjs 16y ago
    But then the program is still not originally written in JavaScript, so no dice. I believe he meant as a web app.
jstevens85 16y ago
It would be great if someone could copy the text of their post. My developer account recently expired and I don't really want to pay $99 just to view one forum post.

aristoxenus 16y ago

That post really puts the "C/C++/Obj-C" thing into much starker relief than the "wish I could use lisp" discussion. Geeks can get around 3.3.1 if they're clever enough; replacing a democratizing technology like Scratch, on the other hand, may be impossible. That said, if their app really was an interpreter, I'm surprised it made it into the store in the first place. And if anything, the typical Scratch output of a crayon-drawn animation designed by a 13-year-old only bolsters Jobs' point about cross-compilers bringing down the average app quality. But I'm very impressed that they had Scratch working on the platform and I hope Apple can find a way to incorporate that educational mission into their world-domination strategy...

stcredzero 16y ago
They built it on top of Squeak. That thing is one of the most straightforward VMs to port. The runtimes execute bit-identical. Years ago they were on 40 different platforms, and I've lost track. It's an incredibly elegant architecture.
- aristoxenus 16y ago
  That's cool. Should have said "happy" instead of "impressed" -- knowing nothing about the technical side, I was imagining the impact of letting kids program ipods/iphones. They must have loved that.
- jfoutz 16y ago
  One javascript implementation is the lively kernel, here http://www.lively-kernel.org/ http://www.lively-kernel.org/ I'd bet there are others.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- astine 16y ago
  This app would've been rejected even before the changes to 3.3.1. It wasn't rejected. It made it into the store and was removed later.
  - aristoxenus 16y ago
    Unfortunately, that in itself is fairly common (gets past one reviewer but rejected/removed much later by another).

cesare 16y ago

"No, it's because (as far as I can tell) the Scratch iPhone app was acting as a Scratch interpreter which is explicitly not allowed on the App Store to begin with." Which goes to show, once again, that this policy is really stupid and that it doesn't affect exclusively developers, but also the educational potential so vehemently touted by all the iPad/iPhone/iTouch fans.

ajg1977 16y ago

So I imagine Apple will soon be taking down the Secret of Money Island and the Sim games, since I know for a fact both of these use interpreters. No, of course they won't. Because those titles bring in big bucks and are from the types of developer Apple wants to develop for their device. It the capricious and selective enforcement of the SDKs T&Cs that is the biggest problem for developers. It's not that Apple are against interpreters, they are just against interpreters when it is not financially beneficial to them.

wvenable 16y ago
Actually they fully allow interpreters as long as it doesn't allow users to run arbitrary code. They allowed the Commodore 64 emulator once direct access to the BASIC interpreter was removed: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/10/iphone-commodore-64-emulator-back-on-the-app-store/ http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/10/iphone-commodore-64-emulat... Of course, all these products were put into the app store before rule 3.3.1.
- wrs 16y ago
  Let's keep it accurate -- that's rule 3.3.2: "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)." When the C64 emulator was released, that "or" was an "and". Now they don't allow non-Apple interpreters at all. (Unless they feel like it.)

stcredzero 16y ago

It should be possible to create a Scratch execution environment on top of Javascript/Safari. A cross compiler done correctly might run faster than the "native" Squeak VM.

icey 16y ago
Do you know if anyone has built anything non-trivial with Clamato? (http://clamato.net/ http://clamato.net/)
- avibryant 16y ago
  I've certainly built stuff with it that is useful, and some if it is even production, but none of it as complex as, say, the Clamato environment itself. I don't know of anyone else who has.
rubinelli 16y ago
But then the program is still not originally written in JavaScript, so no dice. I think a subset of JavaScript plus a nice library would be ok, though.
- jjs 16y ago
  But then the program is still not originally written in JavaScript, so no dice. I believe he meant as a web app.

jstevens85 16y ago

It would be great if someone could copy the text of their post. My developer account recently expired and I don't really want to pay $99 just to view one forum post.