Gi0 writes "After a couple of months of rejection, the C64 Emulator has finally been approved for the iPhone (and is available at the app store now). 'BASIC has been removed for this release; however, we hope that working with Apple further will allow us to re-enable it. Despite its absence, BASIC is not our focus; ultimately, fans of the C64 want games.' It comes with 5 bundled games and will certainly give you that retro fix for your iPhone."
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but isn't the C64 pretty much just a BASIC interpreter? I thought just about everything for the C64 was written in BASIC; and IIRC the start prompt on the C64 took BASIC code natively.
>>>>>isn't the C64 pretty much just a BASIC interpreter? I thought just about everything for the C64 was written in BASIC
Oh my. I will assume you are less than 30, and forgive your ignorance. Yes the C=64 came with BASIC but most everything was *not* written in that because it was too darn slow. Most programs ran directly on the hardware.
>>Obviosuly, you never knew about BASICS's 'peek' and 'poke', in order to get assembly.
Those commands, being part of the Microsoft Basic set, would not be included in this Iphone emulator. Usually when you run games, word processors, internet browsers, or other programs on a C64 you type LOAD "PROGRAM",8,1 which directs the external drive to load that code directly into memory - overwriting everything that's present including the MS-BASIC. The computer than executes instructions directly at the maximum speed possible (i.e. no interpeter to slow things down).
Using this trick, programs can occupy all of the computer's memory except about 5 kilobytes (the screen space, interrupt handlers, and so on).
LOAD "PROGRAM",8,1 which directs the external drive to load that code directly into memory
Almost.
the,8 specified device 8 (generally the primary floppy drive) rather than the default cassette tape drive.
(The under 30 drive probably has no idea what either device looks like)
the,8,1 specifies not only device 8, but that code should load not to the default memory loading location (where basic expects it to be) but rather where the code "wants" to live -- the programmer saves with similar options so the code will load into memory ranges used by the programmer when s/he wrote the code.
This Iphone app emulates the world's most popular CPU - the Commodore/MOS 6502 (and other variants). This processor was the heart of machines like the VIC-20 (10 million sold), C=64 or 128 (40 million), Atari 400/800 computers, Apple I/II/IIc/IIe computers, BBC Micro, Atari VCS/2600 and 5200 game consoles (40 million), Colecovision (10 million), Nintendo Entertainment System (60 million), plus many other applications like store registers and handheld calculators. In total over 200 million 6502s sold.
The 16-bit version called the 65816 (with 6502 backwards compatibility) ran the Apple IIgs, the SuperCPU C=64, and the Super Nintendo, and then the design was retired.
Microsoft wrote the original Basic version 1 for the Pet computer all the rest of the versions where written my Commodore but they were based on the MS Basic on the Pet. Just check the C128 screen after you boot, it says Copyright Microsoft and Commodore.
Back then, Microsoft had versions of BASIC for various platforms, including the Apple ][ plus I had, and for the C64. Back before they started trying to kill the rest of the computing world, they had stuff that would run on different platforms. I even had a version of MS Flight Simulator for the Apple. Mmmm, sweet monochrome wireframe graphics. Ah, memories...
If you played it on an Apple(or an Atari or an Amiga), it wasn't MS sim, it was still Bruce Artwick's. MS licensed it, and later bought it when they started going all monopolistic.
It booted into the basic interpreter by default, leaving you with 38K for basic. You could configure the memory differently. Writing in assembly not only offered a huge improvement in speed, but freed up the memory range from B000 to Bfff. (And the C000 range was often used by calls to machine language subroutines from basic.)
So, no, it was not just a basic interpreter.
There's at least one running as a web server now.
I won't post the link to it. It takes very little to induce the slashdot effect on that hardware.
>>>I won't post the link to it. It takes very little to induce the slashdot effect on that hard
A wise man. But here's some other cool Commodore=64 stuff to check out. Remember this stuff all works on a machine with only a 0.001 gigahertz processor and 0.064 megabytes of RAM.
Commercial software was mostly in machine code, basic was too slow and ate too much memory. Basic was great for beginners and for trying out the programs listed in magazines etc. And yes, it was also the shell, needed for loading from tapes and discs.
For an emulator tho you can populate the memory before starting, so you dont really need the basic.
If theres no basic ROM it will break some programs that used routines from there to save space tho.
Pretty much everything commercial, be it games or productivity software, was written in assembly, usually via machine code monitors.
The BASIC interpreter was pretty bare bones (no sprites/sound/graphics), if you wanted to write games that weren't either text-based adventures or had your character as a horse simulated by the Ï character, you were pretty much required to use machine code. Note that sound/sprites/graphics could be done via PEEK/POKE as mentioned, but was a total chore without a proper mon
BASIC was the "command line language" for C64 and was pretty much useless for any serious application. Most were done in assembly. That being said, to the best of my knowledge, quite a few C64 programs used the BASIC subsystems so the ommission of BASIC may still cause problems.
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday September 07, @02:43PM (#29343283)
The commodore ROMs and the individual games were licensed, but they had to remove the BASIC interpretor. The C64 interpretor said "Commodore BASIC, V2", but it was written by a little company that made money selling its version of 6502 BASIC.
I always knew which company made the barebones BASIC in the C64 because it had the same "print asc(0)" bug that the company provided in Atari, Apple, Amiga and IBM PC BASIC. The company also put an easter egg into Commodore 64 BASIC [wikipedia.org]. When Commodore's Jack Tremail found out this OS vendor had wasted dozens of bytes of his precious ROM for their easter egg, he was furious. It's possible that Apple is still afraid of the license Jack Tramial signed in the early 80s because the little company which put bugs and easter eggs in their BASIC ROM is now a big company known as Microsoft! But more likely, Apple just doesn't want you to be able to run arbitrary applications on their iPhone. They want to control every end of the software development process and if you're able to type your own low-res game, chat application or amortization schedule in Commodore BASIC, Apple doesn't get any royalties. And we can't do fun things like:
10 poke 53265,59
20 wait 60,1
30 poke 53265,27
But frodo64 has provided FULL C64 emulation for Nokia phones for at least 3 years. I think I've run it on a pre 20th century Nokia phone. Nice try Apple, but if you open your OS development environment to those who don't buy your latest OS and hardware and/or if you allow Java applications, you might eventually have as many applications as other phones in the global marketplace. They might not be as flashy or have as polished of an interface, but they will work for the user and for the author.
Played it for about a week just trying to get to the end. It required split-second skills to get past some of the guys. One night I finally get past the last guy and when I finnnaaallly get to the girl... she knifes me.
I was so pissed, I literally threw the floppy disk out the window. Nearly 20 years later I learned it was some dude in drag, and the real girl was behind "him".
Ohhh, and fuck that bird.
Video games have not been that hard for a long time.
by Anonymous Coward
on Monday September 07, @02:30PM (#29343159)
They will never, ever enable BASIC support.
The issue is that Apple doesn't want any iPhone application to be able to install and run other apps. No scripting languages, no loadable modules, etc. If they allowed this then there would be no need for the App Store and anyone could run any application they wanted just by using a "shell" application to load other apps.
Personally I think it's stupid, but it's Apple. They want control and they want your money.
Go to "extra" keyboard and hit reset. Voila, BASIC.
And it sucks. And it's from Microsoft. OMG C64 was evil;-(:-)
Microsoft's greatest blunder in their early years was to license BASIC to Tramiel's Commodore with a once-ever fee of, some say, as little as $50000. C= then sold tens of millions of machines without paying any more to M$.
And because sandboxes tend to leak. VBScript, ActiveX, Flash, Adobe, and Javascript have all had their fair share of vulnerabilities.
Apple is committed to only running signed code on their handhelds. That way, if a regular app is discovered to be malicious, Apple can blacklist it. But how does Apple blacklist malicious third-party unsigned code that another application—say, a Flash player—executes? The best they could do is blacklist the Flash player itself, disabling all the perfectly benign Flash apps and pissing off millions of people.
Now, you may argue that "the user" should have control over what code their phone executes. And in the case of Slashdotters, you're probably right. But normal, non-savvy users don't understand technical warnings. They don't comprehend that executing a tiny bit of malicious code can hand their entire computer over to an attacker, and that there may be no way to undo the damage. They should not be put in a position where they can they can screw up their system with a tap of a "yes" button, for the same reason that cars should not have a "disable emissions controls, gain ten horsepower" switch and skyscrapers should not have a shiny red button that says "collapse building." Curiosity killed the cat, as they say; no matter how well-intentioned the user may be, dancing pigs win out in the end.
So long as Apple provides a means for people who know what they're doing to run custom code—anyone can buy a developer key for about the cost of one month's phone bill—I won't complain about Apple making it harder for ignorant people to do stupid things.
And because sandboxes tend to leak. VBScript, ActiveX, Flash, Adobe, and Javascript have all had their fair share of vulnerabilities
Could you show me one incident where an emulated CPU/hardware system has ever lead to any kind of leak? We're talking about a BASIC interpreter running on a 6510 emulator here. And if the emulator leaking is a concern, then I would think an attacker would more than likely get as low-level as possible and write the attack in 6510 assembler.
Now, you may argue that "the user" should have control over what code their phone executes. And in the case of Slashdotters, you're probably right. But normal, non-savvy users don't understand technical warnings. They don't comprehend that executing a tiny bit of malicious code can hand their entire computer over to an attacker, and that there may be no way to undo the damage. They should not be put in a position where they can they can screw up their system with a tap of a "yes" button, for the same reason that cars should not have a "disable emissions controls, gain ten horsepower" switch and skyscrapers should not have a shiny red button that says "collapse building."
No, actually it's more like saying scissors and knives shouldn't have sharp edges, and that cars shouldn't have accelerator pedals because in both cases it can lead to death or injury. In the case of a car the carnage you can cause unintentionally is so great that you require a license which is only granted when you learn how to drive properly (which is a more advanced skill than using a knife). In the case of scissors and knives there is a risk of injury but you're less likely to kill and maim lots of people and it's left to your parents to teach you the basic skill.
So you could argue that users need to be licensed and should prove they can use their device to no great harm, or more sanely you can argue that since they're most likely to only hurt themselves and not critically. So the skill should be taught at home or at school. Trying to use a phone or computer when you don't understand just doesn't work. It's not that kind of device. In any case if people can learn to text and IM it's an issue of laziness and neglect that they don't bother to learn how to secure their device. It's not brain surgery.
Apple's alternative - locking down the phone - is all about serving Apple's purposes and has nothing to do with the user's needs.
It seems that trying to predict Apple's actions is not terribly easy. I don't really care if they get Basic enabled. I really just want to play games.
What's interesting, however, is you can break into Basic in the app right now.
Here's how you do it.
1. Launch the app. 2. Tap the power button to power on the C64. 3. Tap the Advanced button on the bottom right. 4. Turn the option "Always show full keyboard" on. 5. Tap the "My Games" button on the lower left. 6. Run any game. 7. Tap the "Extra" button under the game screen. 8. Tap the RESET button on the left.
The app launches BASIC.
I don't know if it's fully functional, but it will run the "10 PRINT "I AM SO GREAT!!!!!!" / 20 GOTO 10" program, which is about the extent of my programming skills.
Disclaimer: I did not discover the above. It was posted on Engadget.
Quick, make it more well known so Apple is sure to pull it off the AppStore tomorrow morning, if it takes that long.
You guys are so concerned with showing how cool you are to find the way around things, but too stupid to realize that telling everyone means it'll go away fast as shit. Twits.
I remember reading a description of AMAX somewhere as "a hostile port of the Macintosh OS to the Amiga platform". The Atari ST also had a similar product (though I think it actually came first) called "Magic Sack" I think; got renamed to that due to a lawsuit, don't remember the (probably better) original name.
AMAX patched the Mac Plus ROM to work with the Amiga's hardware, so you just had effectively a Mac Plus. No Color QuickDraw. I remember the compatibility as being pretty good; programs that had tro
it would obviously allow developers to write programs that are far superior to the built in Apple apps and that violates their policy of not being able to "replace" the functionality of the iPhone/iPod Touch.
You know... I guess their right... I mean, really, 40x25 characters and the primitive graphics that Commodore (Microsoft) Basic allowed should really allow modern developers to replace the built in apps with ease.
Seriously, Apple, get off your ass and actually look into the functions you're preven
I'm not sure under which stone you've been lying under, but here is the heads up:
You have to get Apple's blessing in order to distribute anything via the AppStore. AppStore is the only way (short of jailbreak) to get software into the iPhone and iPod Touch. There is no such thing as a "developer hardware" that could make your development/testing easier - you have to wait the random approval process before any hands on testing (you are restricted to software emulators). The development platform is MacOS X only.
There is no such thing as a "developer hardware" that could make your development/testing easier - you have to wait the random approval process before any hands on testing (you are restricted to software emulators).
Last I checked, you could get a developer's signing key to put an unapproved app on a limited number of devices for testing.
AppStore is the only way (short of jailbreak) to get software into the iPhone and iPod Touch. There is no such thing as a "developer hardware" that could make your development/testing easier...
Neither of these statements is strictly true. Enterprise developers can distribute their own applications in-house, just not to the general public. Any developer can distribute their applications ad hoc to up to 100 users.
Your app cannot allow any form of access to cussing words or the like.
The rules were never quite that strict and Apple has relaxed the profanity clauses now that they have included parental controls for the iPhone. Their original concern was they wanted to make sure they did not poison the market for younger people by having issues with pornographic program
Remember the 80's, when it was an Apple person throwing the hammer to destroy the IBM PC "big brother"? Does anyone else find it amusingly ironic that the most controlled platform in existence today is Apple's, and that the Apple fanboys who would have considered themselves to be that person throwing off the chains of PC control in the 80's are today touting the benefits of not having any control over the hardware and software you buy?
As at least one other has pointed out, even when writing in assembly language, it was common to make calls to the BASIC interpreter's functions and routines. If they manage to make things "other than basic" work, it is my guess that they merely disabled basic in some way and did not remove it. By extension, I would guess that it could be re-enabled as well.
It was one of the first computers I learned to use. Despite its limited capabilities I still think it was in many ways superior to the personal computers made today. Certainly it was more encouraging to a young programmer than even a gnu/linux system would be today.
Turtle Neck Gestapo (Score:5, Funny)
"No programming on your iPhone, poseurs.
The iPhone is only to be used for gay, Apple approved activities, like soliciting meth and sex on Cragslist. "
-Steve Jobs
9/7/2009
C64 without BASIC? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:5, Informative)
>>>>>isn't the C64 pretty much just a BASIC interpreter? I thought just about everything for the C64 was written in BASIC
Oh my. I will assume you are less than 30, and forgive your ignorance. Yes the C=64 came with BASIC but most everything was *not* written in that because it was too darn slow. Most programs ran directly on the hardware.
>>Obviosuly, you never knew about BASICS's 'peek' and 'poke', in order to get assembly.
Those commands, being part of the Microsoft Basic set, would not be included in this Iphone emulator. Usually when you run games, word processors, internet browsers, or other programs on a C64 you type LOAD "PROGRAM",8,1 which directs the external drive to load that code directly into memory - overwriting everything that's present including the MS-BASIC. The computer than executes instructions directly at the maximum speed possible (i.e. no interpeter to slow things down).
Using this trick, programs can occupy all of the computer's memory except about 5 kilobytes (the screen space, interrupt handlers, and so on).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
LOAD "PROGRAM",8,1 which directs the external drive to load that code directly into memory
Almost. ,8 specified device 8 (generally the primary floppy drive) rather than the default cassette tape drive. ,8,1 specifies not only device 8, but that code should load not to the default memory loading location (where basic expects it to be) but rather where the code "wants" to live -- the programmer saves with similar options so the code will load into memory ranges used by the programmer when s/he wrote the code.
the
(The under 30 drive probably has no idea what either device looks like)
the
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
LINK to Commodore 64 peripherals (tape drives, disk drives, et cetera): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_64_peripherals [wikipedia.org]
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:5, Informative)
More worthless trash-and-trivia:
This Iphone app emulates the world's most popular CPU - the Commodore/MOS 6502 (and other variants). This processor was the heart of machines like the VIC-20 (10 million sold), C=64 or 128 (40 million), Atari 400/800 computers, Apple I/II/IIc/IIe computers, BBC Micro, Atari VCS/2600 and 5200 game consoles (40 million), Colecovision (10 million), Nintendo Entertainment System (60 million), plus many other applications like store registers and handheld calculators. In total over 200 million 6502s sold.
The 16-bit version called the 65816 (with 6502 backwards compatibility) ran the Apple IIgs, the SuperCPU C=64, and the Super Nintendo, and then the design was retired.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
GW BASIC was the BASIC that shipped with DOS prior to version 5.0 (at which time they switched to QBASIC). It wouldn't have come on a C64.
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If you played it on an Apple(or an Atari or an Amiga), it wasn't MS sim, it was still Bruce Artwick's. MS licensed it, and later bought it when they started going all monopolistic.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually they were called intros. "Demo" meant a standalone (and usually longer than an intro) audio/visual show.
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:4, Interesting)
So, no, it was not just a basic interpreter.
There's at least one running as a web server now.
I won't post the link to it. It takes very little to induce the slashdot effect on that hardware.
Parent
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:5, Informative)
>>>I won't post the link to it. It takes very little to induce the slashdot effect on that hard
A wise man. But here's some other cool Commodore=64 stuff to check out. Remember this stuff all works on a machine with only a 0.001 gigahertz processor and 0.064 megabytes of RAM.
- A web browser - http://www.armory.com/~spectre/cwi/hl/ [armory.com] :-)
- A 1984 Mac-style OS - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEOS_(8-bit_operating_system) [wikipedia.org]
- A true multitasking OS - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Contiki-C64.png [wikipedia.org]
- A photo viewer for your porn... oops, JPEGs - http://www.ffd2.com/fridge/jpeg/ [ffd2.com]
- Okay here you go (NSFW) - http://girls.c64.org/ [c64.org]
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Commercial software was mostly in machine code, basic was too slow and ate too much memory.
Basic was great for beginners and for trying out the programs listed in magazines etc.
And yes, it was also the shell, needed for loading from tapes and discs.
For an emulator tho you can populate the memory before starting, so you dont really need the basic.
If theres no basic ROM it will break some programs that used routines from there to save space tho.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Pretty much everything commercial, be it games or productivity software, was written in assembly, usually via machine code monitors.
The BASIC interpreter was pretty bare bones (no sprites/sound/graphics), if you wanted to write games that weren't either text-based adventures or had your character as a horse simulated by the Ï character, you were pretty much required to use machine code. Note that sound/sprites/graphics could be done via PEEK/POKE as mentioned, but was a total chore without a proper mon
character (Score:2)
... the pi character ...
Unicode support is abysmal round these parts.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Debugging something like
1000 DATA 123, 6, 43, 69, 240, 122, 51
2000 DATA 120, 120, 85, 239, 4
is for suckers
My debugging process --- deleting lines of code at random --- was simple and 100% effective. Sooner or later I always got something that "worked".
Re: (Score:2)
BASIC was the "command line language" for C64 and was pretty much useless for any serious application. Most were done in assembly.
That being said, to the best of my knowledge, quite a few C64 programs used the BASIC subsystems so the ommission of BASIC may still cause problems.
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:5, Informative)
The commodore ROMs and the individual games were licensed, but they had to remove the BASIC interpretor. The C64 interpretor said "Commodore BASIC, V2", but it was written by a little company that made money selling its version of 6502 BASIC.
I always knew which company made the barebones BASIC in the C64 because it had the same "print asc(0)" bug that the company provided in Atari, Apple, Amiga and IBM PC BASIC. The company also put an easter egg into Commodore 64 BASIC [wikipedia.org]. When Commodore's Jack Tremail found out this OS vendor had wasted dozens of bytes of his precious ROM for their easter egg, he was furious. It's possible that Apple is still afraid of the license Jack Tramial signed in the early 80s because the little company which put bugs and easter eggs in their BASIC ROM is now a big company known as Microsoft! But more likely, Apple just doesn't want you to be able to run arbitrary applications on their iPhone. They want to control every end of the software development process and if you're able to type your own low-res game, chat application or amortization schedule in Commodore BASIC, Apple doesn't get any royalties. And we can't do fun things like:
10 poke 53265,59
20 wait 60,1
30 poke 53265,27
But frodo64 has provided FULL C64 emulation for Nokia phones for at least 3 years. I think I've run it on a pre 20th century Nokia phone. Nice try Apple, but if you open your OS development environment to those who don't buy your latest OS and hardware and/or if you allow Java applications, you might eventually have as many applications as other phones in the global marketplace. They might not be as flashy or have as polished of an interface, but they will work for the user and for the author.
Parent
Re:C64 without BASIC? (Score:5, Funny)
I think I've run it on a pre 20th century Nokia phone.
Did it have a big crank on the side?
"Operator! I want to speak to Frantic Freddy!"
Parent
Commodore 64? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Either in C64 emulation or in Apple II emulation, I would like to play Karateka!
Re:Commodore 64? (Score:5, Funny)
I hated that *^*%* game!
Played it for about a week just trying to get to the end. It required split-second skills to get past some of the guys. One night I finally get past the last guy and when I finnnaaallly get to the girl... she knifes me.
I was so pissed, I literally threw the floppy disk out the window. Nearly 20 years later I learned it was some dude in drag, and the real girl was behind "him".
Ohhh, and fuck that bird.
Video games have not been that hard for a long time.
Parent
Eagerly awaiting... (Score:2, Funny)
All I need now is an iPhone emulator for the C64. That way, I can play all my C64 games on my C64
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Here you are - it's surprisingly easy to write once you strip out the functionality that won't ever be hit:
10 PRINT "THIS APPLICATION MAY NOT BE RUN ON NON-APPLE APPROVED HARDWARE"
No way will Apple allow BASIC (Score:3, Informative)
They will never, ever enable BASIC support.
The issue is that Apple doesn't want any iPhone application to be able to install and run other apps. No scripting languages, no loadable modules, etc. If they allowed this then there would be no need for the App Store and anyone could run any application they wanted just by using a "shell" application to load other apps.
Personally I think it's stupid, but it's Apple. They want control and they want your money.
Basic is there. Just reset the emulator. (Score:3, Insightful)
And it sucks. And it's from Microsoft. OMG C64 was evil
Microsoft's greatest blunder in their early years was to license BASIC to Tramiel's Commodore with a once-ever fee of, some say, as little as $50000. C= then sold tens of millions of machines without paying any more to M$.
Well, M$ learned. C= died.
Re:No way will Apple allow BASIC (Score:4, Insightful)
And because sandboxes tend to leak. VBScript, ActiveX, Flash, Adobe, and Javascript have all had their fair share of vulnerabilities.
Apple is committed to only running signed code on their handhelds. That way, if a regular app is discovered to be malicious, Apple can blacklist it. But how does Apple blacklist malicious third-party unsigned code that another application—say, a Flash player—executes? The best they could do is blacklist the Flash player itself, disabling all the perfectly benign Flash apps and pissing off millions of people.
Now, you may argue that "the user" should have control over what code their phone executes. And in the case of Slashdotters, you're probably right. But normal, non-savvy users don't understand technical warnings. They don't comprehend that executing a tiny bit of malicious code can hand their entire computer over to an attacker, and that there may be no way to undo the damage. They should not be put in a position where they can they can screw up their system with a tap of a "yes" button, for the same reason that cars should not have a "disable emissions controls, gain ten horsepower" switch and skyscrapers should not have a shiny red button that says "collapse building." Curiosity killed the cat, as they say; no matter how well-intentioned the user may be, dancing pigs win out in the end.
So long as Apple provides a means for people who know what they're doing to run custom code—anyone can buy a developer key for about the cost of one month's phone bill—I won't complain about Apple making it harder for ignorant people to do stupid things.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Could you show me one incident where an emulated CPU/hardware system has ever lead to any kind of leak? We're talking about a BASIC interpreter running on a 6510 emulator here. And if the emulator leaking is a concern, then I would think an attacker would more than likely get as low-level as possible and write the attack in 6510 assembler.
In other words, your objection is mor
Rubbish. Users need to learn (Score:4, Insightful)
Now, you may argue that "the user" should have control over what code their phone executes. And in the case of Slashdotters, you're probably right. But normal, non-savvy users don't understand technical warnings. They don't comprehend that executing a tiny bit of malicious code can hand their entire computer over to an attacker, and that there may be no way to undo the damage. They should not be put in a position where they can they can screw up their system with a tap of a "yes" button, for the same reason that cars should not have a "disable emissions controls, gain ten horsepower" switch and skyscrapers should not have a shiny red button that says "collapse building."
No, actually it's more like saying scissors and knives shouldn't have sharp edges, and that cars shouldn't have accelerator pedals because in both cases it can lead to death or injury. In the case of a car the carnage you can cause unintentionally is so great that you require a license which is only granted when you learn how to drive properly (which is a more advanced skill than using a knife). In the case of scissors and knives there is a risk of injury but you're less likely to kill and maim lots of people and it's left to your parents to teach you the basic skill.
So you could argue that users need to be licensed and should prove they can use their device to no great harm, or more sanely you can argue that since they're most likely to only hurt themselves and not critically. So the skill should be taught at home or at school. Trying to use a phone or computer when you don't understand just doesn't work. It's not that kind of device. In any case if people can learn to text and IM it's an issue of laziness and neglect that they don't bother to learn how to secure their device. It's not brain surgery.
Apple's alternative - locking down the phone - is all about serving Apple's purposes and has nothing to do with the user's needs.
Parent
Re:No way will Apple allow BASIC (Score:4, Informative)
That's why I would much rather have a Nokia N900 [nokia.com]. No annoying provider tied to the phone, runs an open source OS... Beautiful.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yes I know that, and I live in Europe, thank all deities. But if the N900 isn't a phone then the iPhone isn't either.
Re:No way will Apple allow BASIC (Score:5, Informative)
It seems that trying to predict Apple's actions is not terribly easy. I don't really care if they get Basic enabled. I really just want to play games.
What's interesting, however, is you can break into Basic in the app right now.
Here's how you do it.
1. Launch the app.
2. Tap the power button to power on the C64.
3. Tap the Advanced button on the bottom right.
4. Turn the option "Always show full keyboard" on.
5. Tap the "My Games" button on the lower left.
6. Run any game.
7. Tap the "Extra" button under the game screen.
8. Tap the RESET button on the left.
The app launches BASIC.
I don't know if it's fully functional, but it will run the "10 PRINT "I AM SO GREAT!!!!!!" / 20 GOTO 10" program, which is about the extent of my programming skills.
Disclaimer: I did not discover the above. It was posted on Engadget.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Quick, make it more well known so Apple is sure to pull it off the AppStore tomorrow morning, if it takes that long.
You guys are so concerned with showing how cool you are to find the way around things, but too stupid to realize that telling everyone means it'll go away fast as shit. Twits.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Quick, make it more well known so Apple is sure to pull it off the AppStore tomorrow morning, if it takes that long.
As of this morning it's no longer available in the US, according to the App Store app. :(
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I remember reading a description of AMAX somewhere as "a hostile port of the Macintosh OS to the Amiga platform". The Atari ST also had a similar product (though I think it actually came first) called "Magic Sack" I think; got renamed to that due to a lawsuit, don't remember the (probably better) original name.
AMAX patched the Mac Plus ROM to work with the Amiga's hardware, so you just had effectively a Mac Plus. No Color QuickDraw. I remember the compatibility as being pretty good; programs that had tro
No Basic because... (Score:2)
You know... I guess their right... I mean, really, 40x25 characters and the primitive graphics that Commodore (Microsoft) Basic allowed should really allow modern developers to replace the built in apps with ease.
Seriously, Apple, get off your ass and actually look into the functions you're preven
App approval? (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you *have* to get apples blessing to distribute an app, or is it just to use the appstore?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not sure under which stone you've been lying under, but here is the heads up:
You have to get Apple's blessing in order to distribute anything via the AppStore.
AppStore is the only way (short of jailbreak) to get software into the iPhone and iPod Touch.
There is no such thing as a "developer hardware" that could make your development/testing easier - you have to wait the random approval process before any hands on testing (you are restricted to software emulators).
The development platform is MacOS X only.
Re:App approval? (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no such thing as a "developer hardware" that could make your development/testing easier - you have to wait the random approval process before any hands on testing (you are restricted to software emulators).
Last I checked, you could get a developer's signing key to put an unapproved app on a limited number of devices for testing.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
AppStore is the only way (short of jailbreak) to get software into the iPhone and iPod Touch. There is no such thing as a "developer hardware" that could make your development/testing easier...
Neither of these statements is strictly true. Enterprise developers can distribute their own applications in-house, just not to the general public. Any developer can distribute their applications ad hoc to up to 100 users.
Your app cannot allow any form of access to cussing words or the like.
The rules were never quite that strict and Apple has relaxed the profanity clauses now that they have included parental controls for the iPhone. Their original concern was they wanted to make sure they did not poison the market for younger people by having issues with pornographic program
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember the 80's, when it was an Apple person throwing the hammer to destroy the IBM PC "big brother"? Does anyone else find it amusingly ironic that the most controlled platform in existence today is Apple's, and that the Apple fanboys who would have considered themselves to be that person throwing off the chains of PC control in the 80's are today touting the benefits of not having any control over the hardware and software you buy?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not only that, but you can develop Windows Mobile apps on a Mac.
http://cegcc.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
A C64 emulator without BASIC might be useless (Score:3, Informative)
As at least one other has pointed out, even when writing in assembly language, it was common to make calls to the BASIC interpreter's functions and routines. If they manage to make things "other than basic" work, it is my guess that they merely disabled basic in some way and did not remove it. By extension, I would guess that it could be re-enabled as well.
Rejected (Score:4, Insightful)
And Apple have obviously rejected it again. It now says: No longer available.
Obviously Apple found out that the basic was actually available and removed it.
Re:what's wrong with BASIC? (Score:5, Informative)
That's a DO NOT WANT for Apple
Parent
Re:what's wrong with BASIC? (Score:4, Informative)
It actually is sitting there, just not on the main screen..
Tap reset while in a game (keep the keyboard onscreen) and you're right at the prompt.
Now you can tweet or run a webserver too ;)
Parent
Re:On Android Since June (Score:5, Informative)
Link [wikipedia.org].
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)