[_StephenBB81]

A huge corporation like RIM can't get its android runtime to run any app as complex as those. This guy did this by himself without a big bankroll? It is hard to believe it's true.

RIM can't get their Android runtimes to run the complex Android apps using legal channels, what this guy has here may or may not be legal,

I am sure if we are seeing home brew ports of NES, SNES, Dream Cast and the like, that a home brew iOS port is very possible

[_StephenBB81]

I must say, it's pretty hard to believe. Emulating an entire CPU, like that at near native speeds seems like a pipe dream, let alone the GPU, I/O and sound engine. Modern desktop PCs still have trouble emulating the Nintendo Wii...

Still, I'll suspend my disbelief for now, but I'm VERY skeptical here. And for those saying this would be hard to fake...not really at all.

The problem with the Wii and porting to a PC is a completely different Architecture similar to that of Mac PreIntel and PC,

the Wii uses a PowerPC based chip ( Like Apple did prior to x86)


but back to the Apple port.

Both the PlayBook and the iPhone are built on ARM architecture. so you aren't emulating the CPU, you're building a layer for iOS apps to run. or a VM possibly.
the beauty of iOS is that they usually make sure it is backwards compatible, and I believe it goes back to the 3GS right now which means the specs to run those apps are pretty limited, being partial 600Mhz, Partial 256MB ram, Partial GPU,

It is possible, and I wouldn't be surprised if many people are working on this,
do I think this video is real, not sure what to say, because I agree it could be faked with less work then actually doing it.
If there was a donation page asking for help to release this, then I'd yell fake all day

[mikeo007]

The problem with the Wii and porting to a PC is a completely different Architecture similar to that of Mac PreIntel and PC,

the Wii uses a PowerPC based chip ( Like Apple did prior to x86)


but back to the Apple port.

Both the PlayBook and the iPhone are built on ARM architecture. so you aren't emulating the CPU, you're building a layer for iOS apps to run. or a VM possibly.
the beauty of iOS is that they usually make sure it is backwards compatible, and I believe it goes back to the 3GS right now which means the specs to run those apps are pretty limited, being partial 600Mhz, Partial 256MB ram, Partial GPU,

It is possible, and I wouldn't be surprised if many people are working on this,
do I think this video is real, not sure what to say, because I agree it could be faked with less work then actually doing it.
If there was a donation page asking for help to release this, then I'd yell fake all day

The architecture is the same, but the CPU is still different (Samsung vs TI). You're right about the Wii issue, but I was using it more as an example of the power needed to emulate even rudimentary systems.

[_StephenBB81]

The architecture is the same, but the CPU is still different (Samsung vs TI). You're right about the Wii issue, but I was using it more as an example of the power needed to emulate even rudimentary systems.

Hmmmm I never realized I had to write a program differently for An AMD processor than I would an Intel processor,

[kojita]

This sounds like real stuff, or am I missing something?

[mikeo007]

Hmmmm I never realized I had to write a program differently for An AMD processor than I would an Intel processor,

x86 and ARM are two different things, don't get them mixed up. ARM only licenses the architecture; manufacturers are free to configure the core however they see fit.

[_StephenBB81]

x86 and ARM are two different things, don't get them mixed up. ARM only licenses the architecture; manufacturers are free to configure the core however they see fit.

Did Intel not license x86? I recall back in my OCing days that intel and AMD processors were very different with the first Athlons, and the first Pentium 4's

but only when writing low level code did you need to really care, 99% if not more apps for iOS are not written calling any specific action of a processor,

[mikeo007]

Did Intel not license x86? I recall back in my OCing days that intel and AMD processors were very different with the first Athlons, and the first Pentium 4's

but only when writing low level code did you need to really care, 99% if not more apps for iOS are not written calling any specific action of a processor,

That's because the OS itself handles the hardware calls. You don't have iOS on the Playbook, so those calls have to be translated. If the hardware doesn't support a specific call, it has to be emulated.

It's not that hard to understand. Think of a VM of Windows running on OSX. It works, and it's usable, but it's nowhere near native speed. That's running on the same processor. Now add in the customization that ARM processors have and and running at native speed becomes even more unlikely.

[_StephenBB81]

That's because the OS itself handles the hardware calls. You don't have iOS on the Playbook, so those calls have to be translated. If the hardware doesn't support a specific call, it has to be emulated.

It's not that hard to understand. Think of a VM of Windows running on OSX. It works, and it's usable, but it's nowhere near native speed. That's running on the same processor. Now add in the customization that ARM processors have and and running at native speed becomes even more unlikely.

But on the playbook you have dualcore 1Ghz processors doing the emulation for a Single Core 600Mhz processor, as I mentioned with the iPhone 3GS,

these apps are far from the challenge of emulating Windows on a Mac, or vise versa,

[GeneralTech]

If i were you id do my research and find some sound legal advice from a lawyer in the field and then see what your options are. I don't know what is patented by whom and what can and cannot be used, neither do you at the moment. Then go to rim with it and try to get paid this is too huge not to go the distance with, who knows what rim could legally do with this, assuming its real. They can maybe streamline devs ability to bring more apps into the blackberry 10 fold.

[mssca]

Hmm interesting... Not sure what I think of it yet, however if it is real I'm sure Apple will find some way to bring the fury of their entire legal department down on this guy.

That's why I never buy Apple.

[businesscat2000]

I must say, it's pretty hard to believe. Emulating an entire CPU, like that at near native speeds seems like a pipe dream, let alone the GPU, I/O and sound engine. Modern desktop PCs still have trouble emulating the Nintendo Wii...

The CPU isn't emulated on Playbook (though it is on Windows). It works very similarly to how WINE works to run Windows applications on Linux. The app binary is mapped into memory and imports are resolved to point to my own implementation of the various APIs needed. iOS actually uses a few open APIs already, which Playbook supports just as well (GL ES, and OpenAL). The bulk of the work has been in implementing all of the objective C classes that are required. The ARM code of the applications run as-is - the armv6/v7 support on PB/iDevices are pretty much identical, and the code is designed to run in USR mode. No SWIs, GPIO accesses or any of that kind of shenanigans.

[the_sleuth]

businesscat2000, I applaud your coding skills and ingenuity however the Hammer of Thor (Tim Cook and legal trolls) will fall upon you if you release this to the wild.

Maybe if you release it in Asia, the courts will provide a sympathetic ear but not in N. America nor EU.

[businesscat2000]

businesscat2000, I applaud your coding skills and ingenuity however the Hammer of Thor (Tim Cook and legal trolls) will fall upon you if you release this to the wild.

Maybe if you release it in Asia, the courts will provide a sympathetic ear but not in N. America nor EU.

While I agree with you, I can't come up with a reason other than "we don't like it." There have been plenty of projects like this done before, and many precedents in the past which have all ruled in favour of compatibility.

[mikeo007]

The CPU isn't emulated on Playbook (though it is on Windows). It works very similarly to how WINE works to run Windows applications on Linux. The app binary is mapped into memory and imports are resolved to point to my own implementation of the various APIs needed. iOS actually uses a few open APIs already, which Playbook supports just as well (GL ES, and OpenAL). The bulk of the work has been in implementing all of the objective C classes that are required. The ARM code of the applications run as-is - the armv6/v7 support on PB/iDevices are pretty much identical, and the code is designed to run in USR mode. No SWIs, GPIO accesses or any of that kind of shenanigans.

Interesting...I would have thought that there would be a bigger changes to Apple's custom chip. If they're running basically a to-spec stock core in the A4/A5 SOC then I have gained a lot more respect for Apple's iOS implementation. The efficiency is astounding.

Also, kudos to you for actually reverse engineering this and making it possible. Did you start from scratch, or build off of one of the other open-source iOS projects?

[SteveCoops]

The CPU isn't emulated on Playbook (though it is on Windows). It works very similarly to how WINE works to run Windows applications on Linux. The app binary is mapped into memory and imports are resolved to point to my own implementation of the various APIs needed. iOS actually uses a few open APIs already, which Playbook supports just as well (GL ES, and OpenAL). The bulk of the work has been in implementing all of the objective C classes that are required. The ARM code of the applications run as-is - the armv6/v7 support on PB/iDevices are pretty much identical, and the code is designed to run in USR mode. No SWIs, GPIO accesses or any of that kind of shenanigans.

So nothing illegal - no Apple copyrighted code used or anything like that? In which case get it out there I'd love to find it on some dodgy russian ftp server, or as a torrent...

It's just the .ipa files which will be copyrighted - it's down to the end user to be the judge of the method they obtained them was legal or not.

[hurds]

Even if its not an official release I hope its released as a sort of 'jailbreak' so people can add this emulator to ther BB10 device at their own risk.

[Double_J75]

^ was thinking the same thing. People run VM/Emul all the time and it doesn't cause a stink. The issue is with the games or apps, and as you said that is up to the end user to source on their own. How the end user gets it is of no interest to you (as long as you do not provide the apps).

[marksthespot60]

I'd go form an LLC quickly just for some protection. Depending on your state it can be relatively simple and will give you, as an individual, a titanium wall around your assets. Or perhaps, maintain your animosity and mirror the crap out of it until you can wash your hands free of it and let the rest of the world take the helm. I think this is something Apple really needs

[LimeTripBlog]

Does this work only for games? Or can we run apps like SKYPE!!!!
Thanks for developing such an awesome app, you could release the ios emulator minus the apps.

[digtech]

This is major and its potential is threatening and very much crippling to apple. QNX pawns IOS time and time again. The Os is simply powerful, and right now the only substantial leverage that the ipad has over the playbook is the app ecosystem. If playbook users could tap into that ecosystem it would be major. And also if there arent any legal rigamarole RIM could possibly invest in this and give us something like Android player.

[SteveCoops]

The problem with RIM making it real is that they'd need to make their app store access apple's (or vice versa) and I can't see iTunes touching anything that wasn't an iDevice.

[supraking]

Interesting. Assuming it's not BS, as long as you didn't reverse-engineer any Apple code, you're probably fine. I'd say call up a patent lawyer and get a consultation. Incorporate and release under the appropriate license

Does the emulator offer full support for all Obj-C classes/API's? Because you only seemed to mention (and show) gaming apps, I'd imagine that some core system API's won't work properly.

[TheScionicMan]

The problem with RIM making it real is that they'd need to make their app store access apple's (or vice versa) and I can't see iTunes touching anything that wasn't an iDevice.

Like they did with the Android Player, you appeal to the app devs, since the apps are actually their work, not Apple, to provide the apps. I imagine Apple probably has some sort of exclusivity clause, but is it enforceable?

[glamrlama]

If I could run .ipa files in the PB much like the android player plays .bar files converted from .apk files only there is no conversion required I would do so. I will be watching this with Alot of popcorn! Super exciting stuff; like a disturbance in the freaking "force" exciting.

Does anyone know if devs can sell .ipa files directly or must they be bought through iTunes?

Are you at the WWDC this week? This could make quite a splash there.