Engadget http://www.engadget.com Engadget http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif Engadget http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[Skyfire disappears from iTunes App Store due to technical difficulties (update: 'sold out')]]>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/03/skyfire-disappears-from-itunes-app-store-due-to-technical-diffic/http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/03/skyfire-disappears-from-itunes-app-store-due-to-technical-diffic/http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/03/skyfire-disappears-from-itunes-app-store-due-to-technical-diffic/#comments Trying to get a copy of the Skyfire browser for your iOS device? You may not have much luck, as the pseudo-Flash-capable browser has just disappeared from iTunes App Stores around the globe, mere hours after its splashy debut. When we try to download it for ourselves in the United States we get the message immediately above, and RazorianFly readers are chiming in with reports that the app is no longer available in Greece, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Spain and the UK.

We just pinged Skyfire for comment and they say it's not Apple's fault; demand for a Flash video workaround is apparently so high that the company's having server issues and decided to pull the app rather than introduce new users to a sub-par experience. Skyfire assures us that it's adding servers as quickly as it can, but didn't provide an ETA on when we might see the app once more.

Update: While we're not sure how an digital app can be "sold out," that's exactly what the company says happened to its $2.99 browser today -- after quickly becoming the top grossing app in the iTunes App Store, Skyfire is "temporarily not accepting new purchases" and says it will issue Facebook and Twitter status updates when the next batch of licenses is available. In other words, Skyfire's throttling the flow of purchases from now on. PR after the break.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Continue reading Skyfire disappears from iTunes App Store due to technical difficulties (update: 'sold out')

Skyfire disappears from iTunes App Store due to technical difficulties (update: 'sold out') originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 03 Nov 2010 19:54:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processAppleapprovalapproval processApprovalProcessAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessbreaking newsBreakingNewserroritunes app storeItunesAppStorepulledrejectedrejectionrumorSkyfireWed, 03 Nov 2010 19:54:00 EST<![CDATA[As Apple relaxes App Store rules, C64 emulator for iOS gets BASIC again]]>http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/18/as-apple-relaxes-app-store-rules-c64-emulator-for-ios-gets-basi/http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/18/as-apple-relaxes-app-store-rules-c64-emulator-for-ios-gets-basi/http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/18/as-apple-relaxes-app-store-rules-c64-emulator-for-ios-gets-basi/#comments If you weren't already convinced that Apple is seriously easing back on some of its more annoying App Store restrictions with the appearance of titles like GV Voice (a Google Voice client), this news might help. After a wild ride of ping-pong approvals and pulls, Manomio's C64 emulator has reappeared in the Store with its BASIC interpreter fully intact, and available for your coding pleasure. We've tested the software and can confirm that you will indeed be able to revisit your youth (provided your youth took place in the early 80's) via the newest version of the software. Of course, it's not super fun to program using the tiny, virtual C64 keyboard provided onscreen, but couple this with a Bluetooth keyboard of your choosing, and you can pretty much go wild. The emulator is available right this moment for $4.99, and obviously it's a free upgrade for those who've already bought in.

As Apple relaxes App Store rules, C64 emulator for iOS gets BASIC again originally appeared on Engadget on Sat, 18 Sep 2010 12:31:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store rejectionappleapple app storeAppleAppStoreAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreRejectionc64c64 emulatorC64Emulatorcommodore 64commodore 64 emulatorCommodore64Commodore64EmulatoriosiPhoneiPod touchIpodTouchmanomiorejectionSat, 18 Sep 2010 12:31:00 EST<![CDATA[iWiz dev does good, becomes Apple App Store director]]>http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/iwiz-dev-does-good-becomes-apple-app-store-director/http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/iwiz-dev-does-good-becomes-apple-app-store-director/http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/18/iwiz-dev-does-good-becomes-apple-app-store-director/#comments
To be perfectly honest, we can't believe the above image is running on Engadget either. But with all the ongoing hoopla surrounding the App Store approval process, we'd be remiss if we didn't hep you to recently reported news that Phillip Shoemaker, director of applications technology at Apple, seems to have a healthy sideline developing iOS software with names like iWiz and, ahem, Animal Farts. We'll let you hit the store yourself if you want to learn more about these fine products (search for his company, Gray Noodle). For Apple's part, the company states that the apps were submitted and approved before Shoemaker got the job -- and that, indeed, he was hired in part because of his experience as a developer. Now, if we could only get that Pocket Pain Doctor guy a real job. He looks like he could use one!

Update: We also thought we'd mention that, although Apple stated that the apps were submitted and approved before dude got the job, Shoemaker Tweeted that he had his new employee orientation on March 9, 2009 -- and that Gray Noodle was still publishing apps a month later. What does this mean, exactly? We're not sure (and we're not sure we care), but we figured we'd throw it out there nonetheless.

[Thanks, Rohit]

iWiz dev does good, becomes Apple App Store director originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:29:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>animal fartsAnimalFartsapp storeapp store approvalappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalgray noodleGrayNoodleiosipadiphoneipod touchIpodTouchiwizPhillip ShoemakerPhillipShoemakerWed, 18 Aug 2010 15:29:00 EST<![CDATA[Wi-Fi Sync: wirelessly sync the iPhone with iTunes... in your dreams (video)]]>http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/26/wi-fi-sync-wirelessly-syncs-the-iphone-with-itunes-in-your-d/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/26/wi-fi-sync-wirelessly-syncs-the-iphone-with-itunes-in-your-d/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/26/wi-fi-sync-wirelessly-syncs-the-iphone-with-itunes-in-your-d/#comments Hey iPhone, welcome to 2007. Following Opera's script in building grassroots hysteria to goad Apple into approving a contentious app, developer Greg Hughes is teasing a video of his Wi-Fi Sync app to the peoples of planet internet. As the name implies, the app promises a complete sync of your iPhone or iPod touch with iTunes without having to tether and looks pretty straightforward (and occasionally useful) based on the video demonstration found after the break. Greg says he'll be submitting it to Apple for approval at the end of the week -- good luck with that Greg, we hope to be seeing you on Cydia at the very least.

Continue reading Wi-Fi Sync: wirelessly sync the iPhone with iTunes... in your dreams (video)

Wi-Fi Sync: wirelessly sync the iPhone with iTunes... in your dreams (video) originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 26 Apr 2010 04:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessGreg HughesGregHughesiphoneipod touchIpodTouchitunesitunes syncitunes synchronisationitunes syncingItunesSyncItunesSynchronisationItunesSyncingsyncvideoWi-Fi SyncWi-fiSyncwifi syncWifiSyncMon, 26 Apr 2010 04:03:00 EST<![CDATA[Opera Mini for iPhone submitted to Apple for approval (video)]]>http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/23/opera-submits-opera-mini-for-iphone-to-apple-for-approval-video/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/23/opera-submits-opera-mini-for-iphone-to-apple-for-approval-video/http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/23/opera-submits-opera-mini-for-iphone-to-apple-for-approval-video/#comments Can you feel the tension? Opera is now in the throes of the App Store approval process. The wait is on to see if Apple will loosen its grip and approve the fast (very fast) Opera Mini browser for iPhone app that we checked out at MWC. Remember, Opera Mini relies on Opera's servers to render and compress pages before sending them back to the iPhone for display. As such, there's no code interpretation being done by the software -- a definite no no for approval. So the only thing that could cause Apple to reject the app would be a perceived duplication of core iPhone functionality even though it already approved several WebKit-based browsers. Whatever happens, this is going to be good.

Update: Opera just threw up a counter tracking how long the approval process has taken. You know, 'cause everyone likes to be backed into a corner. Makes you wonder if Opera is serious about this or just doing it for the publicity -- one of several angles we mulled earlier.

Gallery: Opera Mini for iPhone submitted to Apple for approval (video)

Continue reading Opera Mini for iPhone submitted to Apple for approval (video)

Opera Mini for iPhone submitted to Apple for approval (video) originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 23 Mar 2010 08:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessbreaking newsBreakingNewsbrowseriphoneipod touchIpodTouchmobile browserMobileBrowseroperaopera miniOperaMiniTue, 23 Mar 2010 08:01:00 EST<![CDATA[Opera Mini on iPhone is fast, but why?]]>http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/17/opera-mini-on-iphone-is-fast-but-why/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/17/opera-mini-on-iphone-is-fast-but-why/http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/17/opera-mini-on-iphone-is-fast-but-why/#commentsWe came, we saw, and we're still scratching our heads over what Opera is up to with its Mobile World Congress demonstration of its Opera Mini browser running on the iPhone 3GS. But before we get into that, let's talk performance: it's fast. Opera Mini is very, very fast on the iPhone. Loading the New York Times, for example, was about 5x faster than loading the same page in the iPhone 3GS' stock browser. Pages loaded smoothly and were interactive just as quickly as the content began to load -- not unlike the Safari browsing experience. From a functionality standpoint, Opera Mini operates exactly as it does on other, less-contentious platforms. So while double-tap to zoom is supported, pinch-to-zoom is not. The iPhone version does, however, remember the state of the browser when you exit Opera Mini. As such, you'll find your tabs and recent pages right where they were when you last used the app.

The impressive performance gain has to do with how Opera Mini works. First, it's not doing any rendering of the pages or code processing locally. Web pages are processed by Opera's servers before sending just the results to the iPhone. Not only does this speed up the local processing but it also limits the amount of data sent -- a potential big money saver for people browsing while data roaming (like us in Barcelona) or for those without unlimited data plans.

Unfortunately, Opera refused to let us or anyone photograph the app or take any video of it in action. We couldn't even photograph the Opera icon in the launch bar or the wallpaper adorned with the Opera logo. Why? It looks just like Opera Mini beta on any other device so it's not like we're exposing any competitive intelligence. And it's not like Opera would be violating any Apple NDA related to the SDK or the app approval process. Unfortunately, Opera was unable to give us a valid reason other than, "you just can't."

So why is Opera making such a fuss about this before it has even submitted to Apple for approval? We have three theories that we discussed with Igor Netto, Senior Product Manager within Opera's Mobile group. Click through if you like conspiracies.

Continue reading Opera Mini on iPhone is fast, but why?

Opera Mini on iPhone is fast, but why? originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 17 Feb 2010 08:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessiphonemobile world congressmobile world congress 2010MobileWorldCongressMobileWorldCongress2010mwcmwc 2010Mwc2010operaopera miniopera mini 5 betaOperaMiniOperaMini5BetaspeculationWed, 17 Feb 2010 08:01:00 EST<![CDATA[iPhones rejoice as Ustream Live Broadcaster hits App Store, other smartphones wonder what all the ruckus is]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/09/iphones-rejoice-as-ustream-live-broadcaster-hits-app-store-othe/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/09/iphones-rejoice-as-ustream-live-broadcaster-hits-app-store-othe/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/09/iphones-rejoice-as-ustream-live-broadcaster-hits-app-store-othe/#commentsiPhones rejoice as Ustream Live Broadcaster hits App Store, other smartphones wonder what all the ruckus is When it comes to streaming live video from a smartphone, there's an app for that and there has been for a long, long time -- unless you're an iPhoner. With Qik for the iPhone a delayed broadcast was possible, but it took months for the thing to break out of its WiFi-only shackles. Now you, like Bill O'Reilly, can do it live courtesy of the Ustream's Live Broadcaster, newly available in the App Store. It's not the first to stream live video from Apple's handset, an app called Knocking gets that distinction after getting the nod last week, but it is the first to allow live broadcasting, it works over 3G, and it's available for free right now for iPhone 3G and 3GS models running OS 3.1 and above. So go ahead, start those cameras rolling and tell all your friends how great it is -- just don't be heartbroken if they're not all that impressed.

P.S. It's worth noting that Ustream also works in local record mode thus turning the iPhone 3G into a video camera like its newer 3GS sibling. Videos (stuck at 320 x 240 pixels) can then be easily viewed in the Broadcaster app or uploaded to Ustream, YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter.

iPhones rejoice as Ustream Live Broadcaster hits App Store, other smartphones wonder what all the ruckus is originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 09 Dec 2009 06:49:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalbroadcastiphone 3giphone 3gsiphone os 3.1Iphone3gIphone3gsIphoneOs3.1knockinglive video broadcastLiveVideoBroadcastustreamustream live broadcasterUstreamLiveBroadcasterWed, 09 Dec 2009 06:49:00 EST<![CDATA[Facebook app developer rejects App Store, irony ensues]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/#comments
We always said that if Apple's arbitrary, inconsistent, and quite frankly baffling approval process didn't get straightened out soon, the defections were going to pick up pace -- and what do we have here? Joe Hewitt, the developer of the well-loved and highly regarded Facebook iPhone app, has flipped the script and rejected the App Store. And, as you'd expect, our man is not mincing his words, stating that his "decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple's policies," and that he's "philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process." While Hewitt can't comment on specific future projects (he's still at Facebook, but the app itself has been handed off to another developer) he has mentioned that he'll be devoting his time to web development for mobile devices. As you know, there is no approval process for the world wide web (which is apparent if you've spent any time on Geocities back in the day). Way to give 'em hell, Joe!

[Via TUAW]

Filed under: , ,

Facebook app developer rejects App Store, irony ensues originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processApp Store ReviewappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewfacebookiphoneiphone osiphoneosipod touchIpodTouchironyjoe hewittJoeHewittmobileThu, 12 Nov 2009 11:03:00 EST<![CDATA[Facebook app developer rejects App Store, irony ensues]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/12/facebook-app-developer-rejects-app-store-irony-ensues/#comments
We always said that if Apple's arbitrary, inconsistent, and quite frankly baffling approval process didn't get straightened out soon, the defections were going to pick up pace -- and what do we have here? Joe Hewitt, the developer of the well-loved and highly regarded Facebook iPhone app, has flipped the script and rejected the App Store. And, as you'd expect, our man is not mincing his words, stating that his "decision to stop iPhone development has had everything to do with Apple's policies," and that he's "philosophically opposed to the existence of their review process." While Hewitt can't comment on specific future projects (he's still at Facebook, but the app itself has been handed off to another developer) he has mentioned that he'll be devoting his time to web development for mobile devices. As you know, there is no approval process for the World Wide Web (which is apparent if you've spent any time on Geocities back in the day). Way to give 'em hell, Joe!

Filed under:

Facebook app developer rejects App Store, irony ensues originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:01:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processApp Store ReviewAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewfacebookiphoneipod touchIpodTouchironyjoe hewittJoeHewittThu, 12 Nov 2009 11:01:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple rejects Macworld iPhone Superguide from App Store... for using the word 'iPhone']]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/#comments The iPhone App Store's arbitrary and inconsistent approval process continues to baffle and annoy on every level, as Macworld Editor-in-Chief Jason Snell just had his iPhone book rejected... for using the word "iPhone" in the title. Apparently Apple doesn't like app names or icons to include the word iPhone or images of the iPhone -- which arguably makes sense on some level -- but you'd think a freaking iPhone reference manual would warrant an exception, wouldn't you? Making matters worse, it appears that one Mr. David Pogue didn't have this problem, as his iPhone: The Missing Manual was approved with title and icon intact. Sigh. Phil Schiller -- deploy!

Continue reading Apple rejects Macworld iPhone Superguide from App Store... for using the word 'iPhone'

Filed under: ,

Apple rejects Macworld iPhone Superguide from App Store... for using the word 'iPhone' originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:56:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processappleappsAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessdavid pogueDavidPogueiphoneiphone app storeIphoneAppStorejason snellJasonSnellmacworldmobileTue, 03 Nov 2009 14:56:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple rejects Macworld iPhone Superguide from App Store... for using the word 'iPhone']]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/03/apple-rejects-macworld-iphone-superguide-from-app-store-for-u/#comments The iPhone App Store's arbitrary and inconsistent approval process continues to baffle and annoy on every level, as Macworld Editor-in-Chief Jason Snell just had his iPhone book rejected... for using the word "iPhone" in the title. Apparently Apple doesn't like app names or icons to include the word iPhone or images of the iPhone -- which arguably makes sense on some level -- but you'd think a freaking iPhone reference manual would warrant an exception, wouldn't you? Making matters worse, it appears that one Mr. David Pogue didn't have this problem, as his iPhone: The Missing Manual was approved with title and icon intact. Sigh. Phil Schiller -- deploy!

Update: And just like that, Apple has reversed its stance and approved the app unchanged. Internet high-fives all around. [Warning: iTunes link]

Continue reading Apple rejects Macworld iPhone Superguide from App Store... for using the word 'iPhone'

Filed under:

Apple rejects Macworld iPhone Superguide from App Store... for using the word 'iPhone' originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:56:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processappleappsAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessdavid pogueDavidPogueiphoneiphone app storeIphoneAppStorejason snellJasonSnellmacworldTue, 03 Nov 2009 14:56:00 EST<![CDATA[Rejected, 'politically charged' iSinglePayer app gets the green light]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/05/rejected-politcally-charged-isinglepayer-app-gets-the-green-l/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/05/rejected-politcally-charged-isinglepayer-app-gets-the-green-l/http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/05/rejected-politcally-charged-isinglepayer-app-gets-the-green-l/#comments True to form, Apple has rethought its strategy on an App Store rejection, and has granted the "politically charged" iSinglePayer rights to terrorize potential buyers with its alarming messages. If you'll recall, the application tackles the hot-button healthcare issue in America by offering spending advice for consumers and a GPS lookup for local Congress members' and their healthcare-related donations. As we mentioned in our original post, it's a pretty tame set of functionality, and certainly nothing that seems outwardly offensive (at least not any more offensive than lots of apps you can purchase). Just as with our previous complaints about Apple's way of doing business, it's not so much the rejections that bother us, but the unclear set of circumstances by which the company arrives at those decisions. Regardless, some firebrand app reviewer has seen fit to allow this townhall-rattling piece of software into the Store, so now you can go see what all the fuss was about for yourself.

[Via Daring Fireball]

Filed under: ,

Rejected, 'politically charged' iSinglePayer app gets the green light originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp storeapp store approvalapp store rejectionappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreRejectioncontroversyiphoneisinglepayerrejectionRejectionsMon, 05 Oct 2009 20:03:00 EST<![CDATA[First Palm App Catalog rejection: NaNplayer]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/first-palm-app-catalog-rejection-nanplayer/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/first-palm-app-catalog-rejection-nanplayer/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/first-palm-app-catalog-rejection-nanplayer/#comments
Palm's App Catalog isn't exactly bursting with titles yet, but that isn't stopping the company from rejecting apps -- and the dubious honor of First App Rejected goes to NaNplayer, a music player app. Apparently NaNPlayer made use of an undocumented webOS API call, so it makes sense that Palm wouldn't approve it, but there's a somewhat less-sensible flipside: it was using the same API the built-in music player uses to index files so it could make playlists. That's pretty basic functionality, so we're hoping this all gets resolved with a future webOS update -- and in the meantime, NaNplayer will be released to the burgeoning Pre homebrew community when it's complete.

Filed under: ,

First Palm App Catalog rejection: NaNplayer originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:06:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp catalogapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processAppCatalogapprovalappsAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessmobilenanplayerpalmpalm prePalmPreprerejectionweb os webosThu, 10 Sep 2009 11:06:00 EST<![CDATA[First Palm App Catalog rejection: NaNplayer]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/first-palm-app-catalog-rejection-nanplayer/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/first-palm-app-catalog-rejection-nanplayer/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/10/first-palm-app-catalog-rejection-nanplayer/#comments
Palm's App Catalog isn't exactly bursting with titles yet, but that isn't stopping the company from rejecting apps -- and the dubious honor of First App Rejected goes to NaNplayer, a music player app. Apparently NaNPlayer made use of an undocumented webOS API call, so it makes sense that Palm wouldn't approve it, but there's a somewhat less-sensible flipside: it was using the same API the built-in music player uses to index files so it could make playlists. That's pretty basic functionality, so we're hoping this all gets resolved with a future webOS update -- and in the meantime, NaNplayer will be released to the burgeoning Pre homebrew community when it's complete.

Filed under:

First Palm App Catalog rejection: NaNplayer originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:06:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp catalogapp storeapp store approvalapp store approval processAppCatalogapprovalappsAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessnanplayerpalmpalm prePalmPreprerejectionwebosThu, 10 Sep 2009 11:06:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple approves officially-licensed Commodore 64 emulator for iPhone]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/07/apple-approves-officially-licensed-commodore-64-emulator-for-iph/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/07/apple-approves-officially-licensed-commodore-64-emulator-for-iph/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/07/apple-approves-officially-licensed-commodore-64-emulator-for-iph/#comments
Well, it's almost certainly not a signal that Apple is opening the door to emulators of all sorts on the iPhone, but the newly (and finally) approved Commodore 64 emulator is still a fairly notable first for the platform -- representing not only the first officially-available emulator, but perhaps the first app that actually runs code (even if it is a couple of decades old). In this case, that first bit apparently wasn't too big a point of contention for Apple, considering that the app had all the necessary licensing rights lined up, but the second issue was, and ran right up against a clause in the iPhone 2.0 SDK that prevented apps from containing their own executable runtimes. As it happens, the key to bridging that divide around that was none other than iPhone 3.0, which contains a new feature for in-app purchases that the C64 emulator will take advantage of to let folks purchase additional games, rather than load arbitrary game code downloads. Interestingly, while this newly-approved version of the emulator also no longer exposes a BASIC interpreter, Manomio has added a note to the app that it "should be resolved in a future update," although it's not quite clear if that's just wishful thinking or not. In the meantime, you can grab the app right now with five bundled games for $4.99.

Filed under: , , ,

Apple approves officially-licensed Commodore 64 emulator for iPhone originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 07 Sep 2009 12:11:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalc64c64 emulatorC64Emulatoremulatoriphoneiphone 3.0iphone appiphone osIphone3.0IphoneAppiphoneosmobileMon, 07 Sep 2009 12:11:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple approves officially-licensed Commodore 64 emulator for iPhone]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/07/apple-approves-officially-licensed-commodore-64-emulator-for-iph/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/07/apple-approves-officially-licensed-commodore-64-emulator-for-iph/http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/07/apple-approves-officially-licensed-commodore-64-emulator-for-iph/#comments
Well, it's almost certainly not a signal that Apple is opening the door to emulators of all sorts on the iPhone, but the newly (and finally) approved Commodore 64 emulator is still a fairly notable first for the platform -- representing not only the first officially-available emulator, but perhaps the first app that actually runs code (even if it is a couple of decades old). In this case, that first bit apparently wasn't too big a point of contention for Apple, considering that the app had all the necessary licensing rights lined up, but the second issue was, and ran right up against a clause in the iPhone 2.0 SDK that prevented apps from containing their own executable runtimes. As it happens, the key to bridging that divide around that was none other than iPhone 3.0, which contains a new feature for in-app purchases that the C64 emulator will take advantage of to let folks purchase additional games, rather than load arbitrary game code downloads. Interestingly, while this newly-approved version of the emulator also no longer exposes a BASIC interpreter, Manomio has added a note to the app that it "should be resolved in a future update," although it's not quite clear if that's just wishful thinking or not. In the meantime, you can grab the app right now with five bundled games for $4.99.

Filed under: , ,

Apple approves officially-licensed Commodore 64 emulator for iPhone originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 07 Sep 2009 12:11:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalc64c64 emulatorC64Emulatoremulatoriphoneiphone 3.0iphone appIphone3.0IphoneAppMon, 07 Sep 2009 12:11:00 EST<![CDATA[Spotify for iPhone gets thumbs up from Apple, subscription music with offline playlists is a go]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/27/spotify-for-iphone-gets-thumbs-up-from-apple-subscription-music/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/27/spotify-for-iphone-gets-thumbs-up-from-apple-subscription-music/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/27/spotify-for-iphone-gets-thumbs-up-from-apple-subscription-music/#comments Streaming and subscription music services are a dime a dozen on iPhone, and they seem to get past Apple's app store approval hurdles with relative ease. But Spotify was one whose fate wasn't so clear cut, given its offline playlist function -- which as the name suggests downloads songs ahead of time for you to listen to when there's no WiFi or phone service to stream from -- could very easily fall into the category of "duplication of core iPhone functionality" and get deep-sixed at the drop of a hat. Turns out that's not the case here, as an Apple spokesperson has told paidContent UK that the app's been given the metaphorical stamp of approval and would be hitting the store "very soon." A premium subscription will run about £9.99 ($16.20) per month, with an option to pay annually coming at a later date. Of course, there's a catch, as Spotify's service is only available in Sweden, Norway, Finland, the UK, France and Spain for now. The company expects to invade America sometime later this year, but that means another round of app store approvals -- and with Apple's track record on consistency, there's no telling how that'll turn out.

Filed under: ,

Spotify for iPhone gets thumbs up from Apple, subscription music with offline playlists is a go originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:31:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp approvalapp storeapp store approvalAppApprovalappleapprovalAppStoreAppStoreApprovalfinlandfranceiphonemobilenorwayspainspotifystreamstreamingstreaming audiostreaming musicStreamingAudioStreamingMusicswedenukunited kingdomUnitedKingdomThu, 27 Aug 2009 17:31:00 EST<![CDATA[Spotify for iPhone gets thumbs up from Apple, subscription music with offline playlists is a go]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/27/spotify-for-iphone-gets-thumbs-up-from-apple-subscription-music/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/27/spotify-for-iphone-gets-thumbs-up-from-apple-subscription-music/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/27/spotify-for-iphone-gets-thumbs-up-from-apple-subscription-music/#comments Streaming and subscription music services are a dime a dozen on iPhone, and they seem to get past Apple's app store approval hurdles with relative ease. But Spotify was one whose fate wasn't so clear cut, given its offline playlist function -- which as the name suggests downloads songs ahead of time for you to listen to when there's no WiFi or phone service to stream from -- could very easily fall into the category of "duplication of core iPhone functionality" and get deep-sixed at the drop of a hat. Turns out that's not the case here, as an Apple spokesperson has told paidContent UK that the app's been given the metaphorical stamp of approval and would be hitting the store "very soon." A premium subscription will run about £9.99 ($16.20) per month, with an option to pay annually coming at a later date. Of course, there's a catch, as Spotify's service is only available in Sweden, Norway, Finland, the UK, France and Spain for now. The company expects to invade America sometime later this year, but that means another round of app store approvals -- and with Apple's track record on consistency, there's no telling how that'll turn out.

Filed under: ,

Spotify for iPhone gets thumbs up from Apple, subscription music with offline playlists is a go originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:31:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp approvalapp storeapp store approvalAppApprovalappleapprovalAppStoreAppStoreApprovalfinlandfranceiphonenorwayportable audioportableaudiospainspotifystreamstreamingstreaming audiostreaming musicStreamingAudioStreamingMusicswedenukunited kingdomUnitedKingdomThu, 27 Aug 2009 17:31:00 EST<![CDATA[Phil Schiller says Apple didn't censor a dictionary]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/06/phil-schiller-says-apple-didnt-censor-a-dictionary/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/06/phil-schiller-says-apple-didnt-censor-a-dictionary/http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/06/phil-schiller-says-apple-didnt-censor-a-dictionary/#comments Yesterday's story about Apple censoring the Ninjawords dictionary seems to have made some waves in Cupertino -- none other than Phil Schiller followed up with Daring Fireball's John Gruber to provide Apple's perspective on the situation. According to Phil, Apple's objection to Ninjawords was that by using the free Wiktionary.org dictionary, it "provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries," and that the App Store reviewer initially suggested the developer resubmit when iPhone OS 3.0 was launched with parental controls. Since 3.0 hadn't been released yet, the developer censored some of the words in an effort to get onto the store early, and that's how Ninjawords ended up both censored and rated 17+. Sure, okay, except that Gruber points out that the App Store reviewer flagged some pretty generic swear words, not the smack-your-momma vulgarities Phil claims are the issue. Still, the larger message remains the same -- the App Store review process is maddeningly inconsistent and in dire need of reform -- and on that note Phil says Apple intends to "learn and quickly improve," so it sounds like there's hope yet. Check the read link for more of Phil's response, it's an interesting read.

Filed under:

Phil Schiller says Apple didn't censor a dictionary originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:14:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processapp store reviewappleapprovalapproval processApprovalProcessAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewdictionaryiphoneiphone app storeIphoneAppStoreninjawordsphil schillerPhilSchillerreview processReviewProcessThu, 06 Aug 2009 14:14:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple's App Store approves first explicit content, Anita Bryant races to Cincinnati ]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/first-explicit-content-appears-in-app-store-anita-bryant-races/http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/first-explicit-content-appears-in-app-store-anita-bryant-races/http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/first-explicit-content-appears-in-app-store-anita-bryant-races/#comments After all the cases of benign apps being rejected on grounds of "objectionable content," the first outright application featuring jiggly bits has made it to the App Store. How could this happen? Easy, Apple's shift in policy is made possible by the parental controls included in the iPhone OS 3.0 -- you know, so you can parent instead of Apple. Hopefully this brings an end to arbitrary App Store rejections and begins a new era of fire and brimstone threats of eternal damnation.

[Via MacRumors]

Read [Warning: not safe for work]

Filed under: ,

Apple's App Store approves first explicit content, Anita Bryant races to Cincinnati originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:22:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalappleapprovalAppStoreAppStoreApprovalboobsmobilepornrejectionThu, 25 Jun 2009 03:22:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple's App Store approves first explicit content, Anita Bryant races to Cincinnati ]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/first-explicit-content-appears-in-app-store-anita-bryant-races/http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/first-explicit-content-appears-in-app-store-anita-bryant-races/http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/25/first-explicit-content-appears-in-app-store-anita-bryant-races/#comments After all the cases of benign apps being rejected on grounds of "objectionable content," the first outright application featuring jiggly bits has made it to the App Store. How could this happen? Easy, Apple's shift in policy is made possible by the parental controls included in the iPhone OS 3.0 -- you know, so you can parent instead of Apple. Hopefully this brings an end to arbitrary App Store rejections and begins a new era of fire and brimstone threats of eternal damnation.

[Via MacRumors]

Read [Warning: not safe for work]

Filed under:

Apple's App Store approves first explicit content, Anita Bryant races to Cincinnati originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 25 Jun 2009 03:22:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalappleapprovalAppStoreAppStoreApprovalboobspornrejectionThu, 25 Jun 2009 03:22:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple rejects Bittorrent control app from App Store because it might be used to infringe copyrights]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/apple-rejects-bittorrent-control-app-from-app-store-because-it-m/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/apple-rejects-bittorrent-control-app-from-app-store-because-it-m/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/apple-rejects-bittorrent-control-app-from-app-store-because-it-m/#comments
Sigh. Just as we thought Apple's ridiculous App Store approval process was about to get better with the advent of parental controls in iPhone OS 3.0, it goes and pulls another boneheaded move that makes us wonder if the entire system isn't hopelessly broken forever. This time the company's rejected Maza's Drivetrain, an app that allows users to remotely control the Transmission Bittorrent app, because "this category of applications is often used for the purpose of infringing third party rights." Right, "this category of applications," apparently meaning any app that has anything to do with Bittorrent at all -- Drivetrain doesn't actually upload or download anything, it's just used to manage Transmission running on your desktop. That's an awfully paranoid and restrictive stance towards one of the most popular file-transfer protocols around, especially since there are millions of legit torrents available, but somehow we're just not surprised -- this type of foolish, petty, and capricious behavior from Apple has sadly become par for the course with the App Store.

[Via iLounge]

Filed under: , ,

Apple rejects Bittorrent control app from App Store because it might be used to infringe copyrights originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 11 May 2009 12:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processapp store reviewappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewbittorrentdrivetrainiphoneiphone app storeiphone osIphoneAppStoreiphoneosmazamaza digitalMazaDigitalmobileMon, 11 May 2009 12:03:00 EST<![CDATA[Apple rejects Bittorrent control app from App Store because it might be used to infringe copyrights]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/apple-rejects-bittorrent-control-app-from-app-store-because-it-m/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/apple-rejects-bittorrent-control-app-from-app-store-because-it-m/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/11/apple-rejects-bittorrent-control-app-from-app-store-because-it-m/#comments
Sigh. Just as we thought Apple's ridiculous App Store approval process was about to get better with the advent of parental controls in iPhone OS 3.0, it goes and pulls another boneheaded move that makes us wonder if the entire system isn't hopelessly broken forever. This time the company's rejected Maza's Drivetrain, an app that allows users to remotely control the Transmission Bittorrent app, because "this category of applications is often used for the purpose of infringing third party rights." Right, "this category of applications," apparently meaning any app that has anything to do with Bittorrent at all -- Drivetrain doesn't actually upload or download anything, it's just used to manage Transmission running on your desktop. That's an awfully paranoid and restrictive stance towards one of the most popular file-transfer protocols around, especially since there are millions of legit torrents available, but somehow we're just not surprised -- this type of foolish, petty, and capricious behavior from Apple has sadly become par for the course with the App Store.

[Via iLounge]

Filed under:

Apple rejects Bittorrent control app from App Store because it might be used to infringe copyrights originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 11 May 2009 12:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processapp store reviewappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewbittorrentdrivetrainiphoneiphone app storeIphoneAppStoremazamaza digitalMazaDigitalMon, 11 May 2009 12:03:00 EST<![CDATA[iPhone OS 3.0 now being used for App Store admission reviews (updated)]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/iphone-os-3-0-now-being-used-for-app-store-admission-reviews/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/iphone-os-3-0-now-being-used-for-app-store-admission-reviews/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/iphone-os-3-0-now-being-used-for-app-store-admission-reviews/#comments
So this is interesting -- we were just forwarded an email from Apple informing iPhone developers that all future App Store testing and review will occur on iPhone OS 3.0 to prepare for a smooth transition this summer, and that incompatible applications won't be approved. Seeing as we're already on beta 5, we're guessing most devs shouldn't find this too much of a burden, but we're wondering if the recent string of bad publicity over App Store approval guidelines has forced Apple's hand here, since 3.0's parental control features will ostensibly relax Apple's currently asinine content restrictions and allow non-kiddie-apps to get through without any hoopla. Let's hope.

Update: Looks like our guess was spot-on. The iPhone Blog's noticed a new set of parental controls in beta 5 (and possibly earlier) that suggests some sort of app rating system is in the works. Sure, it's a promising idea, but let's just hope the current broken process is also getting an overhaul -- simply slapping a 17+ rating on, say, Tweetie doesn't actually fix the problem.

Filed under: , ,

iPhone OS 3.0 now being used for App Store admission reviews (updated) originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 07 May 2009 17:08:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processapp store reviewappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewiphoneiphone 3.0iphone osIphone3.0IphoneOsmobileThu, 07 May 2009 17:08:00 EST<![CDATA[iPhone OS 3.0 now being used for App Store admission reviews (updated)]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/iphone-os-3-0-now-being-used-for-app-store-admission-reviews/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/iphone-os-3-0-now-being-used-for-app-store-admission-reviews/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/07/iphone-os-3-0-now-being-used-for-app-store-admission-reviews/#comments
So this is interesting -- we were just forwarded an email from Apple informing iPhone developers that all future App Store testing and review will occur on iPhone OS 3.0 to prepare for a smooth transition this summer, and that incompatible applications won't be approved. Seeing as we're already on beta 5, we're guessing most devs shouldn't find this too much of a burden, but we're wondering if the recent string of bad publicity over App Store approval guidelines has forced Apple's hand here, since 3.0's parental control features will ostensibly relax Apple's currently asinine content restrictions and allow non-kiddie-apps to get through without any hoopla. Let's hope.

Update: Looks like our guess was spot-on. The iPhone Blog's noticed a new set of parental controls in beta 5 (and possibly earlier) that suggests some sort of app rating system is in the works. Sure, it's a promising idea, but let's just hope the current broken process is also getting an overhaul -- simply slapping a 17+ rating on, say, Tweetie doesn't actually fix the problem.

Filed under:

iPhone OS 3.0 now being used for App Store admission reviews (updated) originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 07 May 2009 17:08:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>app storeapp store approvalapp store approval processapp store reviewappleAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppStoreApprovalProcessAppStoreReviewiphoneiphone 3.0iphone osIphone3.0IphoneOsThu, 07 May 2009 17:08:00 EST<![CDATA[iPhone OS 3.0's parental controls to assuage some app submission woes?]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/iphone-os-3-0s-parental-controls-to-assuage-some-app-submission/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/iphone-os-3-0s-parental-controls-to-assuage-some-app-submission/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/iphone-os-3-0s-parental-controls-to-assuage-some-app-submission/#comments Here's something that should help Trent reach a level of moderate contentment. Although we already knew that Apple was expanding its parental controls with iPhone OS 3.0 into the realm of TV shows, movies and App Store apps, a report today about the rejection of Makayama's Newspaper(s) app provides a good example at the ramifications of such alterations. According to iLounge, it was rejected due to a picture of a topless woman under the section for UK-based tabloid The Sun. The accompanying letter suggested a resubmission once 3.0 (and subsequently the parental controls) go public, which we take to mean that the questionable content will suddenly be okay for the App Store once it's behind the appropriate age gate. We won't know for sure until everything falls into place, but sounds like this is one part of the submission approval process that'll soon end up much less frustrating for developers.

[Via 9 to 5 Mac]

Filed under: , , ,

iPhone OS 3.0's parental controls to assuage some app submission woes? originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 04 May 2009 20:51:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp approvalapp storeapp store approvalapp submissionAppApprovalappleapple iphoneapple ipod touchAppleIphoneAppleIpodTouchapplicationapprovalAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppSubmissioncontentiphoneiphone osiphoneosipodipod touchIpodTouchmacmobileparentparent controlsparentalparental controlsParentalControlsParentControlsparentsMon, 04 May 2009 20:51:00 EST<![CDATA[iPhone OS 3.0's parental controls to assuage some app submission woes?]]>http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/iphone-os-3-0s-parental-controls-to-assuage-some-app-submission/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/iphone-os-3-0s-parental-controls-to-assuage-some-app-submission/http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/04/iphone-os-3-0s-parental-controls-to-assuage-some-app-submission/#comments Here's something that should help Trent reach a level of moderate contentment. Although we already knew that Apple was expanding its parental controls with iPhone OS 3.0 into the realm of TV shows, movies and App Store apps, a report today about the rejection of Makayama's Newspaper(s) app provides a good example at the ramifications of such alterations. According to iLounge, it was rejected due to a picture of a topless woman under the section for UK-based tabloid The Sun. The accompanying letter suggested a resubmission once 3.0 (and subsequently the parental controls) go public, which we take to mean that the questionable content will suddenly be okay for the App Store once it's behind the appropriate age gate. We won't know for sure until everything falls into place, but sounds like this is one part of the submission approval process that'll soon end up much less frustrating for developers.

[Via 9 to 5 Mac]

Filed under:

iPhone OS 3.0's parental controls to assuage some app submission woes? originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 04 May 2009 20:51:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>appapp approvalapp storeapp store approvalapp submissionAppApprovalappleapple iphoneapple ipod touchAppleIphoneAppleIpodTouchapplicationapprovalAppStoreAppStoreApprovalAppSubmissioncontentiphoneipodipod touchIpodTouchmacparentparent controlsparentalparental controlsParentalControlsParentControlsparentsMon, 04 May 2009 20:51:00 EST