3 ms·

Even without the Oracle ruling, any attempt to commercialize something like this would get shutdown because of how it decrypts IPA files. Not to mention Apple's

Even without the Oracle ruling, any attempt to commercialize something like this would get shutdown because of how it decrypts IPA files. Not to mention Apple's terms of service are very clear that iOS apps cannot be distributed outside of the App Store (the enterprise deployment "store" option being the one exception, and companies pay for that privilege and have to comply with specific guidelines around that).

comex 12y ago
It's not just the apps themselves. In its current state, the program in the paper replaces only the kernel interface and some user libraries (OpenGL); all the rest of the core Apple frameworks are copied from iOS. In theory, a Wine-like project could attempt to reimplement all of these frameworks, which is where the Oracle ruling comes in...
- erichocean 12y ago
  > In theory, a Wine-like project could attempt to reimplement all of these frameworks You mean like the Google Ventures-backed Apportable[0]? It's already delivered 3 of the top 10 games on Android, and I'm currently using it to port a "normal" social network app from iOS to Android (using the development version which re-implements Core Animation on top of OpenGL ES 2). [0] http://www.apportable.com/ http://www.apportable.com/
  - josephlord 12y ago
    And getting back to the Oracle ruling I think the fair-use defence for something like this aimed at a compatible implementation would be stronger than Google's because they were trying to fork the platform and avoid the available Java licensing offers.
mschuster91 12y ago
Base the company in Germany, problem solved. Here it is legal to reverse engineer and reimplement stuff, as long as you're doing it to obtain compatibility with other apps/platforms.
- hwh 12y ago
  Stated in such a general way, this is not true. It's just the case that some contractual preventions of reverse engineering might be invalid. But the moment you distribute something, patent laws can become a big problem.

comex 12y ago

It's not just the apps themselves. In its current state, the program in the paper replaces only the kernel interface and some user libraries (OpenGL); all the rest of the core Apple frameworks are copied from iOS. In theory, a Wine-like project could attempt to reimplement all of these frameworks, which is where the Oracle ruling comes in...

erichocean 12y ago
> In theory, a Wine-like project could attempt to reimplement all of these frameworks You mean like the Google Ventures-backed Apportable[0]? It's already delivered 3 of the top 10 games on Android, and I'm currently using it to port a "normal" social network app from iOS to Android (using the development version which re-implements Core Animation on top of OpenGL ES 2). [0] http://www.apportable.com/ http://www.apportable.com/
- josephlord 12y ago
  And getting back to the Oracle ruling I think the fair-use defence for something like this aimed at a compatible implementation would be stronger than Google's because they were trying to fork the platform and avoid the available Java licensing offers.

mschuster91 12y ago

Base the company in Germany, problem solved. Here it is legal to reverse engineer and reimplement stuff, as long as you're doing it to obtain compatibility with other apps/platforms.

hwh 12y ago
Stated in such a general way, this is not true. It's just the case that some contractual preventions of reverse engineering might be invalid. But the moment you distribute something, patent laws can become a big problem.