Apple Rejects Kid-Friendly Programming App | Hacker News Reader

Apple Rejects Kid-Friendly Programming App

wired.com

63 pointsjbrun26 comments

When I was a kid, the Apple ][ was the system I coveted most to learn how to program. Instead, my computer club could only afford a teletype interface to some remote system (think 1982) and up until recently I've always suffered from at least a partial Mac envy.

No more. This is ridiculous.

Did it just become ridiculous with this current rejection, or was it one of the dozens of previous similar ones where it started becoming ridiculous? And is this really news any more?

No, this is ridiculous:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=site%3Anews.ycomb...

This is hacker news, not Apple gossip.

I just flagged the story.

Steve Jobs owns the Apple platform and can do whatever he wants with it, but he doesn't own Hacker News.

[Edit: Removed "FOAD" to be nicer to AAPL]

Jobs isn't voting these stories up, HN users are.

  I've always suffered from at least a partial Mac envy.

So you don't own a Mac? Let me explain: Apple makes some devices: a phone called iPhone; a music player called iPod. About two weeks ago they started to ship their new product iPad — kind of media consumption device.

And they also make computers, which happen to be called Macs: Mac Pro, iMac, Mac mini and Macbooks. These are great for programming: you get UNIX with GUI what makes sense. Also you get a half a dozen or so programming languages out of the box, including free IDEs.

> Also you get a half a dozen or so programming languages out of the box, including free IDEs.

For now. I'm sure Jobs would love to make the Mac a locked-down platform.

Many of his actions since returning to Apple have been contrary to that goal.

If the personal computer was just coming of age today, the Mac would be a locked down platform with an App Store. Luckily for us, I think it's too late to get away with anything like that on a device that people consider a general purpose computer.

You can download Scratch for Mac here:

http://scratch.mit.edu/download

The rejected iPhone app was merely a Scratch program Viewer. It couldn't be used to actually program using Scratch. That requires a PC or Mac.

It seems completely understandable to me that Apple would not want kids using ipads as toys when they are trying to build a premium product.

They seem acutely aware that the software that most commonly run will define the purpose of the new device and will ultimately define the price. Cheap looking flash widgets and kids toys could damage the image.

I'm sure that there will be plenty of cheap tablets that kids can use, they just won't be using daddy's iPad.

So they are getting rid of all kid toy apps? No, they aren't. Only the ones with these learning through programming aspirations. There are all sorts of other cheap looking toy apps let in, therefore your argument doesn't really work.

Build for the internet! Instead of writing a ROM chip, you wrote easy-to-port software. So build code for a web browser, and route around the arbitrary limitations.

Apple has been much maligned in recent weeks, but I support Steve Jobs on this.

Allowing kids to program on the iPad would empower them, and unleash their creativity; these are clearly undesirable side-effects that Reichsfuehrer Jobs is quite right to suppress.

I think Apple should do an ad campaign to highlight this: "Don't think different. In fact, don't think at all. Let us do your thinking for you. By the way, you owe us $$$$"

Jobs sure is doing a good job of making Microsoft and Gates look saintly.

Someone needs to make an app for handicapped minorities that comes with an embedded interpreter so we can get properly outraged. I'm not sure you can top children, but then we could call Jobs a racist...

Just in case people think this is anything new: this type of app would have been rejected under pretty much any of the earlier development agreements.

Doesn't the article state that it was "removed" from the App Store meaning that it had made it through one of the earlier development agreements, but has since been removed?

So much for the "No worries, Apple is going to enforce its policies selectively, it's really only about Adobe." argument.

Apple has been enforcing the "no interpreters" rule for a long time.

Selectively enforcing. Not against popular games written with lua by big corporations. Which only makes this action worse.

I wonder if Scratch could be hosted remotely in the cloud, with presentation rendering done locally through Javascript & HTML5?

This could be hosted as described: http://www.ngbasic.com/

I learned to program on an Apple IIe, so I have mixed feelings about this.

The more sensible part of me says that the iPad isn't my kids only option for getting their hands dirty with code. Last count, we have around 12-13 computing devices in the house, including iPhones, iTouches, iPads, MacBooks, iMacs, and Linux servers.

When I coded on my Apple IIe, that was it. I had access to some TRS-80s at school, but the Apple was the only computer in a radius of 5 miles from my house.

If Apple were ever to even half consider locking down my desktop/laptop, I'd lead the revolt right to the doors of One Infinite Loop. I doubt they do it though. Hopefully.

What if Apple developed an API specifically for sandboxed scripting engines? They might consider this to be a bad precedent that will later allow something that they don't want. It would be perfect for enabling educational software of this sort, however. If they tweaked the sandbox just right, it could separate the UX of such sandbox environments from the UX of the iPad/iPhone. This could certainly be done in a way which excludes Flash/Adobe as a general purpose application programming language.

I can't summon any indignation about this any more.

I actually think its fine that the app got rejected. The iPad and iPhone are consumer devices.

If kids want to tinker and explore, let them do it on a Real Computer. Plenty of options are there.

No surprise, no news.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com