3 ms·
I think some people (including the app reviewer possibly) are not understanding the SDK terms correctly. "3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch
by jimboyoungblood 17y ago
I think some people (including the app reviewer possibly) are not understanding the SDK terms correctly.
"3.3.2 An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded and used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple's Published APIs and built-in interpreter(s)."
The key phrase here is "other executable code"- i.e., code that isn't already in the application bundle. There's nothing wrong with running an emulator or interpreter. You just can't have it dynamically download new games or apps that weren't already bundled. It's understandable why Apple would have this restriction, or else there would be a lot of people trying to build their own app store within an app.
If the C64 app didn't allow new games to be d/l'ed then there's no reason for the rejection. Perhaps it wasn't clear to the reviewer (it certainly isn't to me, after reading that article) whether it allowed new games to be loaded or not.
- spicyj 17y agoThere's no way that it could have been unclear to the reviewer - if the app includes download functionality, then it would be in the build that the reviewer saw and rejected.