7 ms·

I've just submitted an update to Codea[1] that allows for the importing of user projects[2] It has been "In Review" for a suspiciously long time now. So I thin

I've just submitted an update to Codea[1] that allows for the importing of user projects[2] It has been "In Review" for a suspiciously long time now. So I think it might be testing the application of these updated policies. I have often submitted updates to App Review which include the ability to download and install executable code (along with review notes detailing my reasoning) with the knowledge that they would be rejected. I have also appealed Apple's rejections in order to effect a change in policy for the App Store. At some point during phone calls with the reviewers they told me they were "advocating for policy change internally on my behalf" even if they couldn't approve my app right now. I'm so glad policy has changed now. [1] https://codea.io https://codea.io [2] https://twitter.com/twolivesleft/status/873692454947442688 https://twitter.com/twolivesleft/status/873692454947442688

kbutler 9y ago
Thanks - both for the app and for trying to improve the world for users and other developers!
erikpukinskis 9y ago
This thread is getting beastly but I want to weigh in to comment that The Web is an interesting alternative to this problem. Rather than allowing dangerous apps and requiring them to undergo corporate review, The Web just assumes the app is nefarious, lets anyone at all run anything they want, but architects the runtime so that apps can't do anything unsafe. There is heavy debate about what constitutes "unsafe"... privacy-wise, security-wise. And features like graphics shaders and camera stream take longer to diffuse. And different devices make different choices on these subjects. But choosing to target the browser as The Computer is a vote against app stores. And a vote for bringing the safety and freedom of the sandbox closer to the metal, rather than going straight to the bottom while forfeiting our freedom. Do you accept a class-based system where the privileged class gets "full" device access and hope the class divide gets fairer.... Or do you accept limited device access in exchange for a truly egalitarian distribution landscape, while hoping device access will improve? To me that's the choice for developers, and I choose the latter.
- ksk 9y ago
  Except, the runtime is based on standards that are entirely class-based because of which vendors control the runtime, and can bully their way into standards bodies and push their agenda.
  - erikpukinskis 9y ago
    Yes, political systems are fractal and always contain and are contained in other political systems. It's anarchism at the top and bottom, but there are many layers in between.
    - ksk 9y ago
      I was only disputing the "truly egalitarian" part. Seems like you didn't mean it then?
      - erikpukinskis 9y ago
        I would say there is a space in the web world which is truly egalitarian, and then surrounding that are non-egalitarian structures. The same is true in iOS development, with xCode you can put whatever you want on any phone, so if you ignore digital distribution, there is a space where iOS development tools are truly egalitarian. I could sell iPhone software to you by having someone physically attach your phone to a development machine and install my app. But for most purposes, the egalitarian web space includes a means for reasonable distribution, whereas the egalitarian iOS space doesn't so I am rounding those off to "exists" and "doesn't exist" for the purposes of discussion, because I don't really think a software platform without a legal means of distribution is a "real" platform. But sure, true egalitarianism is an impossible dream that can never exist? I agree, but I don't see how it changes the conversation.
- interpol_p 9y ago
  I feel like you are conflating two issues in your comparison. Building code for devices, and distributing that code on the App Store. We (programmers) have great device access without undergoing corporate review. And this has only gotten better for the Apple ecosystem. I can go to Github, download an open source iOS project and build it for my device. They removed the $99/year barrier. An Apple ID is still needed, but the direction has been positive. Publishing on the App Store is not really relevant. I can experiment, write code, and publish that code without Apple's blessing. Any curated stores (stores for web apps are no exception — like the Chrome store) are going to put limits on what can be published. That is where their value lies. The curation entices users which creates demand that developers can service. Good curation is hard, and doing it well builds user trust. Developers can leverage that trust if they are willing to submit their work for review. And in the case of the App Store, developers can make income from that trust.
robterrell 9y ago
By the way, thanks for Codea! Two of my kids learned to code using it and I just got a third started with it yesterday.
- interpol_p 9y ago
  Wow, thanks for sharing that!

kbutler 9y ago

Thanks - both for the app and for trying to improve the world for users and other developers!

erikpukinskis 9y ago

This thread is getting beastly but I want to weigh in to comment that The Web is an interesting alternative to this problem. Rather than allowing dangerous apps and requiring them to undergo corporate review, The Web just assumes the app is nefarious, lets anyone at all run anything they want, but architects the runtime so that apps can't do anything unsafe. There is heavy debate about what constitutes "unsafe"... privacy-wise, security-wise. And features like graphics shaders and camera stream take longer to diffuse. And different devices make different choices on these subjects. But choosing to target the browser as The Computer is a vote against app stores. And a vote for bringing the safety and freedom of the sandbox closer to the metal, rather than going straight to the bottom while forfeiting our freedom. Do you accept a class-based system where the privileged class gets "full" device access and hope the class divide gets fairer.... Or do you accept limited device access in exchange for a truly egalitarian distribution landscape, while hoping device access will improve? To me that's the choice for developers, and I choose the latter.

ksk 9y ago
Except, the runtime is based on standards that are entirely class-based because of which vendors control the runtime, and can bully their way into standards bodies and push their agenda.
- erikpukinskis 9y ago
  Yes, political systems are fractal and always contain and are contained in other political systems. It's anarchism at the top and bottom, but there are many layers in between.
  - ksk 9y ago
    I was only disputing the "truly egalitarian" part. Seems like you didn't mean it then?
    - erikpukinskis 9y ago
      I would say there is a space in the web world which is truly egalitarian, and then surrounding that are non-egalitarian structures. The same is true in iOS development, with xCode you can put whatever you want on any phone, so if you ignore digital distribution, there is a space where iOS development tools are truly egalitarian. I could sell iPhone software to you by having someone physically attach your phone to a development machine and install my app. But for most purposes, the egalitarian web space includes a means for reasonable distribution, whereas the egalitarian iOS space doesn't so I am rounding those off to "exists" and "doesn't exist" for the purposes of discussion, because I don't really think a software platform without a legal means of distribution is a "real" platform. But sure, true egalitarianism is an impossible dream that can never exist? I agree, but I don't see how it changes the conversation.
interpol_p 9y ago
I feel like you are conflating two issues in your comparison. Building code for devices, and distributing that code on the App Store. We (programmers) have great device access without undergoing corporate review. And this has only gotten better for the Apple ecosystem. I can go to Github, download an open source iOS project and build it for my device. They removed the $99/year barrier. An Apple ID is still needed, but the direction has been positive. Publishing on the App Store is not really relevant. I can experiment, write code, and publish that code without Apple's blessing. Any curated stores (stores for web apps are no exception — like the Chrome store) are going to put limits on what can be published. That is where their value lies. The curation entices users which creates demand that developers can service. Good curation is hard, and doing it well builds user trust. Developers can leverage that trust if they are willing to submit their work for review. And in the case of the App Store, developers can make income from that trust.

robterrell 9y ago

By the way, thanks for Codea! Two of my kids learned to code using it and I just got a third started with it yesterday.

interpol_p 9y ago
Wow, thanks for sharing that!