Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

litchie.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 116 posts

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#31

Post by cageface »

Shank wrote: post #14
mortenjorck wrote: post #7

Original post is from April, but there is an update at the bottom from June: > Got a call from Apple after 2 months. They have decided that iDOS is not a retro game console, so the new rule is not applicable. They suggested I make changes and resubmit for review, but when I asked what changes I should make to be compliant, they had no idea, nor when I asked what a retro game console is. We need a DMA over here yester…

> We need a DMA over here yesterday. I understand why you would believe this, but Apple currently refuses to notarize UTM for distribution outside of the App Store via Notarization under rule 2.5.2: > UTM also noted that Apple is barring UTM SE from being notarized for third-party app stores because the app apparently violated guideline 2.5.2. That rule states that apps have to be self-contained and can’t execute cod…

I could sort of see the justification for requiring notarization giving Apple a kill switch to shutdown malware. But if it's just turning into another kind of app review then we can't really say the Mac is still an open platform.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#32

Post by lxgr »

teruakohatu wrote: post #22

It is worth mentioned that iDOS 2 was a paid app on the App Store for 6-7 years before it was booted. https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/23/22590511/idos-2-emulator-... Safari on iOS has no issues emulating DOS games, other than the UI, I am surprised someone has not just wrapped a WebView in a console-esque UI.

Careful now, or you might just get Safari banned by the App Store reviewers...

Kidding aside, PWAs (also almost killed by Apple in their furious stomping on the ground after the DMA getting passed) used to be the canonical way to get around many App Store limitations in the past. There were quite a few emulators available for it, as well as game streaming clients for things like Stadia.

> Safari on iOS has no issues emulating DOS games, other than the UI, I am surprised someone has not just wrapped a WebView in a console-esque UI.

There's a-Shell, which does something similar, but for WASI as a runtime target instead of DOS.

But to Apple, it usually doesn't even matter how something is accomplished if they don't like the outcome. If they say that "DOS is not a retro console" (what does that even mean!?), they won't allow it in any form. (Sometimes they do care about the how; can't have third-party browser engines, for example.)

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#33

Post by II2II »

cageface wrote: post #28
ilaksh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or go with a more open platform like Android. Although, people might think you are poor. Which would be.. worse than death? Rather just not have an app for some people? lol

Google Play Store review might actually be worse now. It's certainly slower. It's great that you can sideload at least on Android although making money off a sideloaded Android app is very challenging to say the least.

Challenging is better than impossible.

That said, I am left wondering why more major software publishers don't have the option to sideload Android apps. (It was a while since I looked into it, since I mostly use open source apps these days, but it seemed as though most companies were switching to a Google Play Store only route a few years back even though they had the brand recognition to bypass Google's store altogether. The only thing I can think of are support costs, since few people would know how to enable the ability to load apps from other sources.)

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#34

Post by caseyy »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #6

Apple gets a lot of flack for making iOS a closed system and I genuinely believe that the decisions they make are what they believe are in the public good. ...except for App Store reviews, which are frequently irrational, contradictory, and kafkaesque. (Automatically denied because the app shared the name with a version disallowed under the previous policy? Then denied because they had tried too many times? This is a…

> I genuinely believe that the decisions they make are what they believe are in the public good

Time and time again leaked emails show the decisions they make are what they believe are in the interest of money. They have some "do good" ideas, but they don't represent the interests of any public body of people, nor is it their main interest.

If they did, their products would be designed around repairability, for one. And the way they steer general computing into whatever restrictions make them more money (when they could just make general computers like they used to) is definitely not in the interests of the public.

All in all, I don't have a problem with Apple. It's a company, it serves its own investors' needs. It functions very well in the capitalistic system — very successful. But the idea that they, all in all, make decisions for the best of the public is contrived and reaching.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#35

Post by tshaddox »

skissane wrote: post #30
ed_mercer wrote: post #16

Submitting apps to the App Store is one of the more frustrating things in life. Reviewers are lazy, random and don’t do any homework. You roll a dice and hope you don’t have any issues. Couple that with a bloated Xcode that still hasn’t learned anything from VS Code, long compile times, long processing times, bullshit compliance checkboxes and the time-consuming filling out of information of what your app is all abou…

What’s needed is for regulators to step in. Create an independent government-run tribunal to which app store review decisions can be appealed by the developers, and legally mandate Apple/Google/etc to obey its rulings. Maybe the EU will do it. If the EU mandated it other jurisdictions would likely follow. Even if they didn’t, you’d likely just be able to incorporate an EU subsidiary, then resubmit the app in the subs…

A government tribunal is probably one of the very few ways to make the experience worse than it already is.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#36

Post by pjlegato »

skissane wrote: post #30
ed_mercer wrote: post #16

Submitting apps to the App Store is one of the more frustrating things in life. Reviewers are lazy, random and don’t do any homework. You roll a dice and hope you don’t have any issues. Couple that with a bloated Xcode that still hasn’t learned anything from VS Code, long compile times, long processing times, bullshit compliance checkboxes and the time-consuming filling out of information of what your app is all abou…

What’s needed is for regulators to step in. Create an independent government-run tribunal to which app store review decisions can be appealed by the developers, and legally mandate Apple/Google/etc to obey its rulings. Maybe the EU will do it. If the EU mandated it other jurisdictions would likely follow. Even if they didn’t, you’d likely just be able to incorporate an EU subsidiary, then resubmit the app in the subs…

Allowing government bureaucrats to oversee the app store review process seems like quite possibly the only single thing that could make it even slower, more frustrating, and more arbitrary than it is now.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#37

Post by dang »

Related. Others?

“Apple has removed iDOS 2 from AppStore, citing the same old 2.5.2.” - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28122895 - Aug 2021 (2 comments)

iDOS 2 will be gone soon - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27924207 - July 2021 (409 comments)

IDOS strikes back, returns to the App Store - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2123727 - Jan 2011 (1 comment)

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#38

Post by lxgr »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #6

Apple gets a lot of flack for making iOS a closed system and I genuinely believe that the decisions they make are what they believe are in the public good. ...except for App Store reviews, which are frequently irrational, contradictory, and kafkaesque. (Automatically denied because the app shared the name with a version disallowed under the previous policy? Then denied because they had tried too many times? This is a…

Often enough, Apple's and consumers' selfish interests overlap. That's ok, they're not a nonprofit organization, and this type of win-win is a great example of capitalism working out well!

But I'd never mistake that for altruism or "taking decisions in the public good". They're a for-profit corporation, and these sometimes have the unfortunate habit of turning to rent seeking to keep supporting the profits expected of them even in the face of changing market realities. That's why we have regulators.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#39

Post by cageface »

II2II wrote: post #33
cageface wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Play Store review might actually be worse now. It's certainly slower. It's great that you can sideload at least on Android although making money off a sideloaded Android app is very challenging to say the least.

Challenging is better than impossible. That said, I am left wondering why more major software publishers don't have the option to sideload Android apps. (It was a while since I looked into it, since I mostly use open source apps these days, but it seemed as though most companies were switching to a Google Play Store only route a few years back even though they had the brand recognition to bypass Google's store altoge…

You can't get push notifications in a sideloaded app right?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#40

Post by reaperman »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #6

Apple gets a lot of flack for making iOS a closed system and I genuinely believe that the decisions they make are what they believe are in the public good. ...except for App Store reviews, which are frequently irrational, contradictory, and kafkaesque. (Automatically denied because the app shared the name with a version disallowed under the previous policy? Then denied because they had tried too many times? This is a…

Nit: flak
Post reply on HN