tlangster wrote:

They did, but it got taken down by Apple for programs inside programs.

Wait for them to come out with a HTML5 version, they probably will.

Programs inside programs- that is the stupidest reason to remove an app

<KMQTKLLR3000>
7827772373773974

I don't know why everyone is overlooking the fact that Scratch is a nonprofit meaning that they get to publish apps for free so I'll make a diagram using ScratchBlocks

when green flag clicked
if <(nonprofit organization) = [true]> then 
nonprofit organizations get to publish apps for free
else
organizations making a profit have to pay to publish apps
end

when I receive [scratchblocks v]
if <(confused) = [true]> then
broadcast [confusion v]
stop [brain v]
end
[/scratchblocks]

supersonic61223 wrote:

I don't know why everyone is overlooking the fact that Scratch is a nonprofit meaning that they get to publish apps for free so I'll make a diagram using ScratchBlocks

when green flag clicked
if <(nonprofit organization) = [true]> then 
nonprofit organizations get to publish apps for free
else
organizations making a profit have to pay to publish apps
end

For real. I actually missed that completely lol

gdfsgdfsgdfg wrote:

Try not to bump the topic unless it’s past the second page or it has been >24 hours since the last post ;)

-effortIess- wrote:

Try not to bump the topic unless it’s past the second page or it has been >24 hours since the last post ;)

Was it actually on front page? I didn’t check

gdfsgdfsgdfg wrote:

(#308)

Naccim wrote:

scratch wouldn't want to have an app on a third-party appstore, they'll think it's unsafe

Trollstore is not a 3rd party appstore its a permanent .ipa signer and sideloader
and Trollstore is safe to use
https://theapplewiki.com/wiki/TrollStore

The average iPad user doesn't even know how to manage files, do you really think they know how to sideload?

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

(#356)

-effortIess- wrote:

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

gdfsgdfsgdfg wrote:

cookieclickerer33 wrote:

Case closed, it costs $100 a month to have an app on the App Store, there’s no way they can pay for that if they can barely afford to keep the site itself running

does it still cost money for corporations (including non-profits)

Yes, I’ve talked with a friend who wanted to port his aindrioid game to apple (he has no corp) and it costs 100 a month at minimum.

Every app on the App Store has someone paying 100 a month for it

Not that 100 bucks a month is insignificant, but doesn’t it cost much more to, say, pay the software engineers?

They can barely keep the servers online with their current budget, and that budget is getting thinner by the day. As opposed to google’s $25 one time fee for an entire publisher, $100 per app is not affordable. Especially for an app that being allowed on te play store in the first place is in a grey area.


Especially because they would likely also port scratch jr, doubling the cost

Ok what are you even saying at this point?
1. If you actually read what they posted, and it clearly states for exceptions (meaning they do not have to pay the $100 fee)

Be a legal entity with a status as a nonprofit organization¹, accredited educational institution², or government entity

2. The fee isn't $100 per app, it's $100 per developer (which as I've already talked about, doesn't apply)
3. Scratch Jr. is already on the app store, published by the Scratch Foundation (a non-profit)
4. The Scratch Foundation isn't poor. I don't know how everyone started thinking it is, but it isn't

You almost certainly won't see that much money in your lifetime

I am an iOS developer, Apple enthusiast, and web developer so I feel like I am qualified to comment on this.
First of all, the App Store guidelines do not block Scratch from making an iOS/iPadOS app. That was changed a while ago, and you can find all sorts of apps that allow coding in much more powerful languages.
And, they literally have the ScratchJr app which came out after the Scratch Viewer app was removed from the store. So the entire debate is literally null.

As for the development needed, there are several options you could take. Scratch runs as a React web app right now. React has a variant called React Native which is used for native development. It's not easy to transfer from React to RN, but it's definitely not starting from zero. There's also Cordova which, while probably not ideal, will build a native app directly from the current codebase in a few minutes. Finally, they could start from scratch (pun intended) and build a native Swift and SwiftUI app, which would be massive ordeal. The Scratch Team would probably use React Native if I had to guess.

There's no real reason why they haven't done this already other than it's not their priority. The ST could easily do this if they wanted. They probably want to do it. It just isn't a priority for them.
(Also, Scratch Team, if you're reading this, I will contribute to a native SwiftUI app if you make one!)

scratchusername40 wrote:

I am an iOS developer, Apple enthusiast, and web developer so I feel like I am qualified to comment on this.
First of all, the App Store guidelines do not block Scratch from making an iOS/iPadOS app. That was changed a while ago, and you can find all sorts of apps that allow coding in much more powerful languages.
And, they literally have the ScratchJr app which came out after the Scratch Viewer app was removed from the store. So the entire debate is literally null.

As for the development needed, there are several options you could take. Scratch runs as a React web app right now. React has a variant called React Native which is used for native development. It's not easy to transfer from React to RN, but it's definitely not starting from zero. There's also Cordova which, while probably not ideal, will build a native app directly from the current codebase in a few minutes. Finally, they could start from scratch (pun intended) and build a native Swift and SwiftUI app, which would be massive ordeal. The Scratch Team would probably use React Native if I had to guess.

There's no real reason why they haven't done this already other than it's not their priority. The ST could easily do this if they wanted. They probably want to do it. It just isn't a priority for them.
(Also, Scratch Team, if you're reading this, I will contribute to a native SwiftUI app if you make one!)

Thanks for the contribution to the forum and clearing up some things. If the ST or OP could pin things to the front of a forum page this would probably be what is pinned.

when I receive [scratchblocks v]
if <(confused) = [true]> then
broadcast [confusion v]
stop [brain v]
end
[/scratchblocks]

AndrewSpeeder wrote:

tlangster wrote:

They did, but it got taken down by Apple for programs inside programs.

Wait for them to come out with a HTML5 version, they probably will.

Programs inside programs- that is the stupidest reason to remove an app

It doesn't matter how silly it is, if Apple says it doesn't want it then we cant change that.

((( OwO :: #DC381F) :: #FFCC00)  :: #FFCC00)

MagicCoder330 wrote:

AndrewSpeeder wrote:

tlangster wrote:

They did, but it got taken down by Apple for programs inside programs.

Wait for them to come out with a HTML5 version, they probably will.

Programs inside programs- that is the stupidest reason to remove an app

It doesn't matter how silly it is, if Apple says it doesn't want it then we cant change that.

Did you even read #369?

Scratch runs on HTML5 now- no more flash. Therefore, Safari supports it.

Also, the Scratch Team could just make a PWA (progressive web app), which once downloaded from the Scratch website can run on most anything HTML5 standards-compliant.

forever
if <person asks [what's a signature] :: sensing> then
Redirect to [https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Signature] :: motion
end
end

 [code] and [/code] 

 [color=color name or hexadecimal value here] and [/color] 

dhuls wrote:

The average iPad user doesn't even know how to manage files, do you really think they know how to sideload?

how tho

BigNate469 wrote:

Scratch runs on HTML5 now- no more flash. Therefore, Safari supports it.

Also, the Scratch Team could just make a PWA (progressive web app), which once downloaded from the Scratch website can run on most anything HTML5 standards-compliant.

While this is what most people would do and would be simple to make for the ST, people want to have a native application that can be downloaded and allow you to access all of the features of web-based Scratch but without the bugs and unoptimized environment that comes from having a PWA or a web app that supports multiple devices at once.

when I receive [scratchblocks v]
if <(confused) = [true]> then
broadcast [confusion v]
stop [brain v]
end
[/scratchblocks]

supersonic61223 wrote:

BigNate469 wrote:

Scratch runs on HTML5 now- no more flash. Therefore, Safari supports it.

Also, the Scratch Team could just make a PWA (progressive web app), which once downloaded from the Scratch website can run on most anything HTML5 standards-compliant.

While this is what most people would do and would be simple to make for the ST, people want to have a native application that can be downloaded and allow you to access all of the features of web-based Scratch but without the bugs and unoptimized environment that comes from having a PWA or a web app that supports multiple devices at once.

True.

forever
if <person asks [what's a signature] :: sensing> then
Redirect to [https://en.scratch-wiki.info/wiki/Signature] :: motion
end
end

 [code] and [/code] 

 [color=color name or hexadecimal value here] and [/color] 

This topic should have been closed eons ago, as my self and lost’s of other people have given correct answers. This topic is still open for incompetent people continuing on the topic, refusing to take this stuff as an answer.

PyraEthan12 wrote:

This topic should have been closed eons ago, as my self and lost’s of other people have given correct answers. This topic is still open for incompetent people continuing on the topic, refusing to take this stuff as an answer.

False.
It's a valid suggestion. Not a question.
Times change, and this has not been rejected. And no, talk on why it was removed isn't a reason for rejection.
Scratch can make it into the App Store, as it's exempt to the reason it was initially removed.
Additionally, quit acting like others who give a different answer, or discuss differently, are incompetent.

GlitchedThrough wrote:

PyraEthan12 wrote:

This topic should have been closed eons ago, as my self and lost’s of other people have given correct answers. This topic is still open for incompetent people continuing on the topic, refusing to take this stuff as an answer.

False.
It's a valid suggestion. Not a question.
Times change, and this has not been rejected. And no, talk on why it was removed isn't a reason for rejection.
Scratch can make it into the App Store, as it's exempt to the reason it was initially removed.
Additionally, quit acting like others who give a different answer, or discuss differently, are incompetent.

“Who Discuss Differently” pfff this topic has already been answered, there are only two definitive answers, from both NOW and back THEN.

PyraEthan12 wrote:

GlitchedThrough wrote:

PyraEthan12 wrote:

This topic should have been closed eons ago, as my self and lost’s of other people have given correct answers. This topic is still open for incompetent people continuing on the topic, refusing to take this stuff as an answer.

False.
It's a valid suggestion. Not a question.
Times change, and this has not been rejected. And no, talk on why it was removed isn't a reason for rejection.
Scratch can make it into the App Store, as it's exempt to the reason it was initially removed.
Additionally, quit acting like others who give a different answer, or discuss differently, are incompetent.

“Who Discuss Differently” pfff this topic has already been answered, there are only two definitive answers, from both NOW and back THEN.

False.
Did you not look at the subforum? This ain't a question. It's a suggestion. Ain't no answer.
Are you viewing your answer as Gospel? Are you saying that Scratch isn't an exemption to the rule that got it removed in the first place? Are you saying that it's ineligible for being added to the App Store?
All of the above are false. You haven't the power to reject a suggestion.