[nick-dap]

"merely (!) trying to control what tools people use to create software on their platform"

Put any OS of your choice, except iPhone, in that sentence and it sounds pretty darn insane to me.

[sant0sk1]

Don't game consoles have expensive, compulsory SDKs?

[jrockway]

Yeah, and that's why your console spends 90% of its life powered off.

[sant0sk1]

Don't get me wrong, I think it is a stupid policy even for Nintendo, Sony et al. My point is that stupid != insane.

[nfnaaron]

Insanely stupid then.

[commieneko]

I thought that was because I had to go to work...

[oconnor0]

Even if they do you can still write your own languages that compile down. Ala: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Oriented_Assembly_Lisp

[vegashacker]

No, that's exactly what the terms are saying you _can't_ do. If you used something like GOAL, you wouldn't be starting out in Objective C, and thus you'd be in violation of the new terms.

[NickPollard]

He was referring to game consoles, for which you _can_ use other languages to compile down from, so they are less restrictive than the iPhone.

[vegashacker]

Thanks. Sorry, I misread. And that's an interesting point too, because until now, an argument I commonly heard in support of Apple was, "At least the App Store is better than the console game environment."

[sgoraya]

Yes, but you are not restricted in what tools you can use to develop and compile your code.

[CamperBob]

Yes, and none of them have ever included a rule against cross-compiled code, to the best of my knowledge.

[MichaelGG]

Right, none of them have the complete monopoly to insist on exclusive titles. Notice how big a deal they make it when they do get a studio to do an exclusive.

Apple can get away with this for now, then when WinPhone7 comes out (or somehow they get some real competition), start backing off if they need to. In the meantime, they'll build up more developers that have developed skills in iPhone only tools.