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

91–100 of 116 posts

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#91

Post by rekoil »

Someone wrote: post #78
rekoil wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

App IDs don't really work for this purpose if Apple aren't in control of generating them, nothing is stopping a malware vendor from literally never reusing app IDs. Notarization is a reasonable implementation, and it can even require some form of developer identification, it just can't be very deep identification, an e-mail address is enough (along with IP and other metadata gathered during the process). That way the…

> nothing is stopping a malware vendor from literally never reusing app IDs. Or form using the ID of another vendor. > and it can even require some form of developer identification, it just can't be very deep identification, an e-mail address is enough (along with IP and other metadata gathered during the process). I expect the typical malware writer will easily find a way to have a unique “e-mail address (along with…

Yes, but all attempts at circumventing the system will give Apple more information about their behaviour. If 1000 different users are requesting to sign the same (or only slightly differing) IPA within a short period of time, from different IPs and different emails, it's a good indicator that something fishy is going on.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#92

Post by LocalH »

It seems like their issue is that DOS is available for use, underneath everything. I wonder if they'd apply the same restrictions to, say, a Commodore 64 or Apple II emulator that provides BASIC access?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#93

Post by phone8675309 »

TillE wrote: post #63
Shank wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> While the DMA may eventually force Apple to slide on this rule, currently it doesn't actually solve the problem at-hand. People keep saying stuff like this about the DMA and it's very confusing to me. Of course Apple can choose to break the law, but there are consequences for that. It doesn't mean the law is ineffective just because investigation and enforcement is not instantaneous.

Right?

By that logic, why have laws against murder?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#95

Post by scarface_74 »

infotainment wrote: post #17
LeoPanthera wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DMA stifles innovation and would make many recent iOS features illegal. Apple Intelligence - points you to Apple Music or Apple Maps as a response to your query? Illegal. iPhone Mirroring - doesn't work with Windows or Android. Illegal. Shareplay screen sharing - doesn't work with Windows or Android. Illegal. There's a reason those features are not getting an EU release.

Honestly, good . If Apple can't make those features interoperable, then they shouldn't exist at all. With Apple's size and access to development resources, there is absolutely no excuse for them other than greed.

And they won’t exist in the EU…

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#96

Post by jncfhnb »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #49
jncfhnb wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be illegal for them to prohibit an app on their store and alternative distribution. Triply so if it at all competes with them.

> It should be illegal for them to prohibit an app on their store and alternative distribution. Triply so if it at all competes with them. My very amateur reading of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40773883 is that it probably literally is (edit: in the EU, to be clear). It'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

Well it very simply is because the EU has demanded third party app stores

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#97

Post by immibis »

scarface_74 wrote: post #95
infotainment wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, good . If Apple can't make those features interoperable, then they shouldn't exist at all. With Apple's size and access to development resources, there is absolutely no excuse for them other than greed.

And they won’t exist in the EU…

Good.

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#98

Post by hu3 »

InvOfSmallC wrote: post #88
Kwpolska wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This app was also rejected from EU alternative app stores (which is illegal BTW), so the only way to get it would be something like the classic AltStore, which requires a real computer, and allows only three apps to be installed, and the apps expire every 7 days. https://faq.altstore.io/how-to-use-altstore/your-altstore

You can use sideloadly my friend. No need of a computer after first installation of sideloadly itself.

in iOS?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#99

Post by scarface_74 »

immibis wrote: post #97
scarface_74 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they won’t exist in the EU…

Good.

So you’re okay with a feature not existing for customers who want because the government deigns that they shouldn’t have it? You really want the government taking away your agency to make your own choices?

Re: iDOS 3 Rejected by Apple

#100

Post by INGSOCIALITE »

kelnos wrote: post #56
INGSOCIALITE wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Companies exist at the pleasure of societies (aka governments), so those societies have literally every right to tell those companies what they can and cannot do. I guess you also think it's bonkers that car makers are required to put seatbelts in their cars.

actually yes, if i buy a car without a seatbelt anything that happens is on me.

if i buy an apple phone that requires a 9000$ magic charger that's on me

etc

Post reply on HN