Slashdot Mirror
DOS Emulator In and Out of App Store
gent01 writes "A company called Fast Intelligence got DOSBox running on iOS and dubbed it iDOS. It's been stuck in review for the app store for some time. Evidently the iDOS app was in the app store this morning, but it has already been taken down."
Bad command or file name.
Aren't most iPhones still on AT&T? I'm not sure why you'd need to emulate no service.
Duh. By emulating DOS, you allow the user to run any DOS program they want. In other words, you make the device programmable. That's a no-no on the App store.
As "aDosBox".. http://androiddosbox.appspot.com/
-Lod
Really, are they so threatened by a 30-year-old operating system that they have to kill it?
This is the ONE reason that I hate Apple. Wonderful hardware, great software, management needs to be shot. I am a geek. If somebody arbitrarily decrees that certain classes of software WILL NOT be allowed on a platform, I arbitrarily decree that they get absolutely none of my money.
If Apple would have a change of heart about such things, I would be their biggest fan. As it is, I am their worst foe.
"-1 Troll" is the apparently the same as "-1 I disagree with you."
It's actually GPL3 code that can't be used in any apps for the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad due to the anti-Tivoization clauses in GPL3 and the completely locked down nature of iOS and the app store.
Portable versions of Firefox, GIMP, LibreOffice, etc
DOSBox is a reverse-engineered re-implementation of the PC BIOS (int13h et al) and DOS APIs (int21h et al) and the x86 CPU. There's no Microsoft, Digital Research, IBM or whatever code in there. At all.
Really, are they so threatened by a 30-year-old operating system that they have to kill it?
Anything that would allow a user to run a non-Apple-approved program, anything at all, even a DOS emulator, is against the rules. After all, the users might start thinking that they have some kind of right to run software that was not approved, and next thing you know, they'll be wanting to write programs without paying the fee, or worse yet, they might start wanting to use libre software! None of this, of course, is allowable in Steve Jobs' world, where people are just sheep who are in desperate need of a shepherd.
Remember, the Apple ideology is that people should not have any desire to hack their systems; they should simply use them, and rely on Apple to take care of technical details. This has been the case for a very long time now, and as long as Steve Jobs is in charge, you can bet that there won't be any change.
Palm trees and 8
That's because in the US it's considered acceptable to accuse a politician of being both fascist and socialist at the same time. Both sides when you get far enough are completely nuts, but try comparing Naziism with Soviet Communism. The difference is significant.
If I had DOS then I could have installed an old version of cygwin and then got my favourite GNU tools working! Jobs would have had a fit it I could have done that.
Very significant, millions died on both sides.
An incorrect quote. "The (laws) are meant to be (followed), not to be (questioned). And while I'm a (citizen) I'm very happy about these things. Something that doesn't require to be (thought about) and that doesn't need to be (discussed) and where even someone is actively taking away any temptation for me to waste my time on it is a nice change now and then."
Products aren't meant to hacked. That's a voluntary process done by those with the skill and inclination when they feel the need, either from a defect in the original product, a lack of functionality in the original product, or a sense of curiosity and invention. You don't have to hack anything, you don't have to think either, but some people do, and many people feel that someone attempting to prevent them from doing non-dangerous and perfectly legal things with the products they bought is wrong. If you want to read something about the legal basis many people refer to, please look up "Doctrine of First Sale".
IMO, if you aren't hurting anyone, it's none of their business what you do with your property. So if you don't want to alter your stuff, that's fine, all you need to do is to do nothing, but to say that others shouldn't because you don't feel like it is rather deplorable on your part.
The problem is not that they make it easy. The problem is that they intentionally make it hard to tinker with.
I'm the author of a very compact, complete and quite speedy 6809/FLEX emulator... I'd love to port that to the iP(o|a)d. Hadn't even tried because of the "no emulated code" policy Apple inflicts on developers. If they approve this DOS thing - eventually, I understand they're still rejecting on that basis right now - I'll hit that baby hard. What a trip it would be to go from my old SS-50 system, really quite a bit of hardware ca. 1970s, to having it in my pocket. Hoo. Double hoo. In the meantime, back to my usual level of discontent...
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
you can't spell it without CIALIS either so at least we know that after the revolution we will all be aroused.
that's why Steve create Apple-Script and all sort of applications have exposed hooks so that users can script things that just ain't gonna happen in the other camp.
Steve created Apple-Script? Yeah, right. I'd like to know how many lines Steve contributed to OSX, actually. I suspect not very many.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
> that's why Steve create Apple-Script
Let's see... when did AppleScript appear? Oh yeah, 1993.
Where was The Steve in 1993? Oh yeah, at NeXT!