Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Pull 'iDOS 2' DOS Emulator From App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hubris breeds the tyrant. Apple has a good case for the App Store in terms of privacy and security but they are starting to overreach. They better rein themselves in a little before the domino starts to fall.
If you want complete freedom to download and tinker around, iOS isn’t for you. You knew this before you signed up, so don’t act like you’re entitled to something that was never on offer. Stop the whining and just move on. There are plenty of people happy with the platform that Apple created.
That being said, if there was a way to work within the guidelines to offer something like this, it would be pretty neat. If I could pull up old Apple II programs, I would be all over that. But I’m not holding my breath, and I’m not going to whine. Even a little whine is not good for the soul.
That being said, if there was a way to work within the guidelines to offer something like this, it would be pretty neat. If I could pull up old Apple II programs, I would be all over that. But I’m not holding my breath, and I’m not going to whine. Even a little whine is not good for the soul.
There was an article floating around recently about how to get Windows 3.1 running on it to use on the iPad which may have generated too much interest.
Indeed, the % of people who want to - in this direct example - play DOS on their iPhone, would be minuscule... And Apple didn't become a multi trillion dollar company worrying about niche.
No.
- App offloading can remove the app from the device.
- The developer could terminate (or be terminated) from the App Store, preventing re-installation.
- Code signing certificate could expire (or be expired), preventing the app to run.
In iDOS' case, no bigger "security issue" than executing random JavaScript programs from random websites.
That's what iOS' sandboxing is supposed to take care.
Maybe I can get an emulated virus infection using this app? 
It then can emulate breaking thru iOS sandbox and infect my iPhone. Right?
It then can emulate breaking thru iOS sandbox and infect my iPhone. Right?
Sounds like you'd be happier with a non-Apple, non-iOS device.
One you can "sideload" an app to find you places that sell avocado toast and switchel in a smug (I meant mug).
But I understand what you mean: why can't I buy a new F-150 with a 3.5L twin-turbo engine, and then install a Dodge Ram transmission---with the warranty still intact and protected by Ford?
Deep thoughts for a Thursday, I'll tell ya.
My Android phone was absolute garbage from a thermal standpoint. Not to mention battery life wasn’t great. Was nice to be able to sideload, but I often didn’t need to as aDOSBox and old school console emulators exist on the Play Store. Which aDOSBox is pretty much identical to iDOS 2 in every way… it just doesn’t have the same level of polish.
I've been using retroarch and other opensource emulators on Android for years. Apple needs to get over this control complex and give power users that know what they're doing the option to sideload apps.
Schools, workplaces, and abusive governments will mandate people download apps full of private API calls. People make the argument "they can't really force you", but is it worth your career to refuse? Most will just install the app and suffer the consequences.
Just today I had to sign up for a school portal (SaaS) that stores unchangeable passwords in plain text. Why would I trust those same people to run unchecked native code on my device?
there are legitimate and innocent reasons for sideloading ..issues come in when sideloading is used for harmful ways not by the user but by those creating apps. Then when issues arise Apple will be blamed for user mistakes in sideloading things they don’t know would cause any issues.
given it’s apples ecosystem they have the right IMO to decide what does or does not happen and why we as consumers have the right to pick and choose the device with an ecosystem that works for us.
given it’s apples ecosystem they have the right IMO to decide what does or does not happen and why we as consumers have the right to pick and choose the device with an ecosystem that works for us.
Schools and organizations can already do this. They just force you to download a profile - which you have to comply with in order to get access to "X"
I don't want to and shouldn't have to. Apple has great engineering and design teams, crippled by their management, finance and marketing teams. I shouldn't have to choose between using a crippled version of the device that will never reach its full potential or fully utilize lesser hardware.
Apps cannot run executable code?
- what is considered executable code inside an app anyway?
> Running a script (DOS on a remote PC), PowerShell (again remote PC)? Many of us in I.T. do this daily with several apps.
Not sure I understand this rule.
So If I wanted to make an app that runs solely on device no server connection and yet connects to other users that have the same app (no central server) does that violate the policy?
You want sideloading to run game emulation - which may/may not have rights to the old ROMs and not licensed? If that's the case this isn't about Apple's moral code, it's more about the end user not checking or willing to pay for what they're enjoying.
PS: I'm not sure if ROMs is part of the issue, just more of a broader request that's suited this debate before.
- what is considered executable code inside an app anyway?
> Running a script (DOS on a remote PC), PowerShell (again remote PC)? Many of us in I.T. do this daily with several apps.
Not sure I understand this rule.
So If I wanted to make an app that runs solely on device no server connection and yet connects to other users that have the same app (no central server) does that violate the policy?
You want sideloading to run game emulation - which may/may not have rights to the old ROMs and not licensed? If that's the case this isn't about Apple's moral code, it's more about the end user not checking or willing to pay for what they're enjoying.
PS: I'm not sure if ROMs is part of the issue, just more of a broader request that's suited this debate before.
Oldest news there is. Since the dawn of the App Store, Apple has been disallowing emulators. I'm surprised he even got the first version onto the store.
Thankfully I pulled the trigger anyways, and as long as I have a copy of it, I should be able to load and use it while I can.
To anyone who says going to android, it’s time to put that stupid nonsense argument to rest, as it means nothing. Copyright and license issues seems make sense, but then why Google gets away with it, while somehow Apple can’t? People yell “freedom and choice” yet allow Apple to offer no choice and strict control. Baffles me every time I am thinking about it. Makes no sense.
To anyone who says going to android, it’s time to put that stupid nonsense argument to rest, as it means nothing. Copyright and license issues seems make sense, but then why Google gets away with it, while somehow Apple can’t? People yell “freedom and choice” yet allow Apple to offer no choice and strict control. Baffles me every time I am thinking about it. Makes no sense.
Its dumb that one needs to buy a PC or extra android device along with their Apple gear to have a computing life without limits. Most limits are imposed by Apple and not the rest. All these modern devices are capable of so much more than Apple allows us to use them for and it will get worse after they put M1 chips in all their devices. It will be very clear how much control Apple imposes when the device will be fast enough to do just about any computing function but the user is locked out of such functionality. Golden handcuffs.