Talking to Steve Jobs about Scratch.

> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app, I've seen lots of discussion and speculation flow by on the esug, scratch and pharo lists, some of it correct, and some of it incorrect.
>
> First, Scratch.app was remove from sale in the app store because the Scratch programming language is an interpreted language, and it's not on the approved interpreted language list.  My understanding is that Apple has not yet rejected apps because they are "made" with a particular language.  The rejection is solely due to the result of Scratch being a non approved 'interpreted" language.
>
> Second, I drafted a letter titled: "Rejecting an app with foundations in the Dynabook vision" and posted it to: https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425
>
> At this time, this letter is not for public viewing since I want to have more discussion with Apple and the paid Apple developer community. It seems having public rage about the unfairness about what Apple is doing just makes Apple less receptive to dialog. I would ask the community not to cross post my letter anywhere until we have had more discussions with Apple. As an example this morning there was talk with a member of the App review team about having this matter ending up on Phil Shiller's desk.
>
> Third, I sent a copy of the letter to Steve Jobs.  He did respond.  Our incomplete conversation is private, no solution or decision has been reached, and due to Apple's earnings reports coming up next tuesday I don't foresee any activity on the matter until after that event.
>
> Fourth, I have interest & support from Dr Alan Kay, Dr Mitchel Resnick, and others, I think people do take the matter about the freedom to write applications in a language of their choosing and using a particular implementation (interpreted, JIT, compiled) seriously, so I hope movement with Apple on the general topic will occur shortly.
>
> Once Apple's management team has made a response I'm sure you will all hear about it.
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]>   Twitter:  squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ===========================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app, I've seen lots of discussion and speculation flow by on the esug, scratch and pharo lists, some of it correct, and some of it incorrect.
>
> First, Scratch.app was remove from sale in the app store because the Scratch programming language is an interpreted language, and it's not on the approved interpreted language list.  My understanding is that Apple has not yet rejected apps because they are "made" with a particular language.  The rejection is solely due to the result of Scratch being a non approved 'interpreted" language.
>
> Second, I drafted a letter titled: "Rejecting an app with foundations in the Dynabook vision" and posted it to: https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425
>
> At this time, this letter is not for public viewing since I want to have more discussion with Apple and the paid Apple developer community. It seems having public rage about the unfairness about what Apple is doing just makes Apple less receptive to dialog. I would ask the community not to cross post my letter anywhere until we have had more discussions with Apple. As an example this morning there was talk with a member of the App review team about having this matter ending up on Phil Shiller's desk.
>
> Third, I sent a copy of the letter to Steve Jobs.  He did respond.  Our incomplete conversation is private, no solution or decision has been reached, and due to Apple's earnings reports coming up next tuesday I don't foresee any activity on the matter until after that event.
>
> Fourth, I have interest&  support from Dr Alan Kay, Dr Mitchel Resnick, and others, I think people do take the matter about the freedom to write applications in a language of their choosing and using a particular implementation (interpreted, JIT, compiled) seriously, so I hope movement with Apple on the general topic will occur shortly.
>
> Once Apple's management team has made a response I'm sure you will all hear about it.
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> John M. McIntosh<[hidden email]>    Twitter:  squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ===========================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app, I've seen lots of discussion and speculation flow by on the esug, scratch and pharo lists, some of it correct, and some of it incorrect.
>
> First, Scratch.app was remove from sale in the app store because the Scratch programming language is an interpreted language, and it's not on the approved interpreted language list.  My understanding is that Apple has not yet rejected apps because they are "made" with a particular language.  The rejection is solely due to the result of Scratch being a non approved 'interpreted" language.
>
> Second, I drafted a letter titled: "Rejecting an app with foundations in the Dynabook vision" and posted it to: https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425
>
> At this time, this letter is not for public viewing since I want to have more discussion with Apple and the paid Apple developer community. It seems having public rage about the unfairness about what Apple is doing just makes Apple less receptive to dialog. I would ask the community not to cross post my letter anywhere until we have had more discussions with Apple. As an example this morning there was talk with a member of the App review team about having this matter ending up on Phil Shiller's desk.
>
> Third, I sent a copy of the letter to Steve Jobs.  He did respond.  Our incomplete conversation is private, no solution or decision has been reached, and due to Apple's earnings reports coming up next tuesday I don't foresee any activity on the matter until after that event.
>
> Fourth, I have interest & support from Dr Alan Kay, Dr Mitchel Resnick, and others, I think people do take the matter about the freedom to write applications in a language of their choosing and using a particular implementation (interpreted, JIT, compiled) seriously, so I hope movement with Apple on the general topic will occur shortly.
>
> Once Apple's management team has made a response I'm sure you will all hear about it.
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]>   Twitter:  squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ===========================================================================
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Esug-list mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.esug.org/listinfo/esug-list

> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app, I've seen lots of discussion and speculation flow by on the esug, scratch and pharo lists, some of it correct, and some of it incorrect.
>
> First, Scratch.app was remove from sale in the app store because the Scratch programming language is an interpreted language, and it's not on the approved interpreted language list.  My understanding is that Apple has not yet rejected apps because they are "made" with a particular language.  The rejection is solely due to the result of Scratch being a non approved 'interpreted" language.
>
> Second, I drafted a letter titled: "Rejecting an app with foundations in the Dynabook vision" and posted it to: https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425
>
> At this time, this letter is not for public viewing since I want to have more discussion with Apple and the paid Apple developer community. It seems having public rage about the unfairness about what Apple is doing just makes Apple less receptive to dialog. I would ask the community not to cross post my letter anywhere until we have had more discussions with Apple. As an example this morning there was talk with a member of the App review team about having this matter ending up on Phil Shiller's desk.
>
> Third, I sent a copy of the letter to Steve Jobs.  He did respond.  Our incomplete conversation is private, no solution or decision has been reached, and due to Apple's earnings reports coming up next tuesday I don't foresee any activity on the matter until after that event.
>
> Fourth, I have interest&  support from Dr Alan Kay, Dr Mitchel Resnick, and others, I think people do take the matter about the freedom to write applications in a language of their choosing and using a particular implementation (interpreted, JIT, compiled) seriously, so I hope movement with Apple on the general topic will occur shortly.
>
> Once Apple's management team has made a response I'm sure you will all hear about it.
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> John M. McIntosh<[hidden email]>    Twitter:  squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ===========================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>
> Great news, Wired also picked up on the story:
>
> http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/apple-scratch-app/
>
> The more public outrage about Apple's policies, the better.
>
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
> On 4/16/2010 11:09 AM, John M McIntosh wrote:
>> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app, I've seen lots of discussion and speculation flow by on the esug, scratch and pharo lists, some of it correct, and some of it incorrect.
>>
>> First, Scratch.app was remove from sale in the app store because the Scratch programming language is an interpreted language, and it's not on the approved interpreted language list.  My understanding is that Apple has not yet rejected apps because they are "made" with a particular language.  The rejection is solely due to the result of Scratch being a non approved 'interpreted" language.
>>
>> Second, I drafted a letter titled: "Rejecting an app with foundations in the Dynabook vision" and posted it to: https://devforums.apple.com/thread/46425
>>
>> At this time, this letter is not for public viewing since I want to have more discussion with Apple and the paid Apple developer community. It seems having public rage about the unfairness about what Apple is doing just makes Apple less receptive to dialog. I would ask the community not to cross post my letter anywhere until we have had more discussions with Apple. As an example this morning there was talk with a member of the App review team about having this matter ending up on Phil Shiller's desk.
>>
>> Third, I sent a copy of the letter to Steve Jobs.  He did respond.  Our incomplete conversation is private, no solution or decision has been reached, and due to Apple's earnings reports coming up next tuesday I don't foresee any activity on the matter until after that event.
>>
>> Fourth, I have interest&  support from Dr Alan Kay, Dr Mitchel Resnick, and others, I think people do take the matter about the freedom to write applications in a language of their choosing and using a particular implementation (interpreted, JIT, compiled) seriously, so I hope movement with Apple on the general topic will occur shortly.
>>
>> Once Apple's management team has made a response I'm sure you will all hear about it.
>>
>> --
>> ===========================================================================
>> John M. McIntosh<[hidden email]>    Twitter:  squeaker68882
>> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
>> ===========================================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

> Obviously I'm collecting media links on the issue http://www.mobilewikiserver.com/Scratch.html
> --
> ===========================================================================
> John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]>   Twitter:  squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ===========================================================================
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

> Morning, I've posted the letter I had posted to the Apple developer forums and sent to Steve Jobs at
>
> http://www.mobilewikiserver.com/Interpreters.html
>
> I'll suggest there was some lifting of concept and quotes by Wired from letter.
>
> As of this morning I have no further news, I have heard thru various sources that the issue is not dead yet,
>
> So I wait.
>
> On 2010-04-16, at 11:09 AM, John M McIntosh wrote:
>
>> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app
>
> --
> ===========================================================================
> John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]>   Twitter:  squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> ===========================================================================
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

> Good!
> John in future version it may be good to mention that ESUG supported  
> this VM work for the iphone.
>
> STef
>
> On Apr 21, 2010, at 8:12 PM, John M McIntosh wrote:
>
>> Morning, I've posted the letter I had posted to the Apple developer  
>> forums and sent to Steve Jobs at
>>
>> http://www.mobilewikiserver.com/Interpreters.html
>>
>> I'll suggest there was some lifting of concept and quotes by Wired  
>> from letter.
>>
>> As of this morning I have no further news, I have heard thru  
>> various sources that the issue is not dead yet,
>>
>> So I wait.
>>
>> On 2010-04-16, at 11:09 AM, John M McIntosh wrote:
>>
>>> Let me give everyone an update on what is going on with Scratch.app
>>
>> --
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =====================================================================
>> John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]>   Twitter:  
>> squeaker68882
>> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =
>> =====================================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>

>
> On 2010-04-21, at 1:13 PM, stephane ducasse wrote:
>
>> Good!
>> John in future version it may be good to mention that ESUG supported this VM work for the iphone.
>>
>> STef
>
> Yes, I did conduct a magazine interview today where I ensured I did mentioned that ESUG funding was
> instrumental in getting the foundations of Scratch (aka Squeak VM) onto the iPhone, otherwise it
> would never have happened.

> Phil, last week I asked the smalltalk community (ESUG  etc), to stay  
> claim and wait for Apple to think about it based on an email
> exchange I had with Steve Jobs. At the time I thought it prudent to  
> wait a further decision or statement.
>
> Give that Wired publish Alan & my thoughts on the matter it's likely  
> now time to consider what to do next.
>
> So this is NOT the fault of ESUG not being proactive, they were  
> itching to do something.
>
> At the moment I believe they are collecting ideas how to approach  
> the problem in a meaningful manner.
> Suggestions are welcome.
>
>
> On 2010-04-21, at 1:29 PM, Phil (list) wrote:
>
>> I've been surprised that I haven't seen any statement from ESUG re:  
>> how these policies negatively impact the future prospects for  
>> Smalltalk on the iPhone/iPad and the investments they've made in  
>> the platform to date that Apple seems willing to wipe out.  
>> Wouldn't now be a good time to try to get some visibility on the  
>> larger issue?
>>
>> Phil
>
> --
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> ======================================================================
> John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]>   Twitter:  
> squeaker68882
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://
> www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> =
> =
> =
> =
> =
> ======================================================================
>
>
>
>

> On 21.04.2010, at 22:56, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:48 PM, John M McIntosh
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Phil, last week I asked the smalltalk community (ESUG  etc), to stay claim
>> and wait for Apple to think about it based on an email
>> exchange I had with Steve Jobs. At the time I thought it prudent to wait a
>> further decision or statement.
>>
>> Give that Wired publish Alan & my thoughts on the matter it's likely now
>> time to consider what to do next.
>>
>> So this is NOT the fault of ESUG not being proactive, they were itching to
>> do something.
>>
>> At the moment I believe they are collecting ideas how to approach the
>> problem in a meaningful manner.
>> Suggestions are welcome.
>
> Port to Android asap.  Competitive pressure can make Apple move.  I'm not
> sure about anything else.
>
> Apple will move eventually. I found this illuminating about their motives:
> http://www.asktog.com/columns/082iPad&Mac.html