How many programs nowadays of the complexity of Google voice don't use some kind of internal state machine interpreter or domain-specific-language to simplify the programming model?
So they could use that loophole in a negative way to hinder competition whenever they choose to do so, not saying they "would" but they certainly "could".
Except they "didn't". They've already listed their reasons (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/apple-answers-fcc-questions/) and to my knowledge have never used the interpreter rule in anything remotely resembling the way you describe.
Comments
Apple could easily reject Google voice app with their "thy program shalt not containeth an interpretereth" loophole in the iPhone SDK agreement section 3.3.2... they've done this with at least one app that I'm aware of (http://toucharcade.com/2009/06/20/full-commodore-64-emulator... and http://www.manomio.com/index.php/blog/important_update).
How many programs nowadays of the complexity of Google voice don't use some kind of internal state machine interpreter or domain-specific-language to simplify the programming model?
So they could use that loophole in a negative way to hinder competition whenever they choose to do so, not saying they "would" but they certainly "could".
Except they "didn't". They've already listed their reasons (http://www.apple.com/hotnews/apple-answers-fcc-questions/) and to my knowledge have never used the interpreter rule in anything remotely resembling the way you describe.