Live data from Hacker News

'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

theguardian.com

121–130 of 870 posts

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#121
Xfinity sent me a new cable modem this week.

Came with zero instructions for set up, just a QR code. Scanned the QR code and it took me to install an app. I begrudgingly installed it.

The app had me hit next a few times before scanning a different QR code on the bottom of the modem. That was the entire process.

I guess you just have to pay for installation if you don't have a smart phone? It offered for $150+ when I agreed to the new modem.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#122
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By choice. Society doesn't penalize anyone if they decide to go off the grid. Look at it this way: should the rest of us with smartphones pay for that bank office?

I have a smartphone. However I choose to use a mobile OS that is neither Android nor iOS, why should I get penalized that banks don't invest in applications for my OS too?

It’s business. Should a steakhouse be required to have vegan offerings? If that’s not what their customers want, then why would they invest hundreds of thousands on building and maintaining an app that maybe five people would use?

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#123
> The consumer group is among those to have highlighted Lidl’s loyalty scheme, Lidl Plus, as one that is only accessible via an app, with an email address also required.

At least here in Finland Lidl Plus is one of the few which can be used by just entering a phone number.

That said, all "loyalty programs" should be outright banned. They stifle competition, make pricing less transparent and discriminate against the less well off.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#124
I think this article is city-centric. I am in a rural area in the US and I have only had a smart phone for 2 years and have never installed any apps beyond Mumla that I use for my own self hosted uMurmur server. I have never browsed the web from the phone. My life today is just as it was in the 1970's in that regard. All the businesses here have printed coupons. There are local printed newspapers. I have zero dependency on any "smart" features of phones unless one considers texting to be a smart feature given that was not a thing in the 70's. I do not expect any of that to change. The people here like keeping things simple. With exception of Amazon to get things small shops here do not carry I could even kill my internet connection and life would go on just fine. I would probably even get healthier. All the local businesses know me by name so I guess that makes up for a lack of cookie tracking.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#125

I avoid apps too if I can. So rare that the app does anything a website can't. Indeed most apps are implemented with embedded browsers. It's about tracking, and push notifications. Full stop.

Cue HN's anti-PWA brigade.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#126

It feels on a par with illiteracy. The motives and circumstances are different, but it's got a similar level of assumption. It's kinda rare and requires significant adaptation, so it's just way easier to assume it doesn't happen. I don't think that a law to help people get smartphones is the answer, the way we made literacy education mandatory. But it's rapidly going to be seen as a handicap.

Literacy skills increase monotonically though. If you learn to read adult novels while in grade school, you can still continue reading grade school books as well. Whereas if you learn tech to the proficiency of understanding how corporate apps are attacking you, or if you simply take administrative control of that computer you carry everywhere, then you can then find yourself unable to engage despite having higher than the basic skill level.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#127
I’m fascinated by this phenomenon of apps proposing solutions that are far worse than the previous existing solutions.

For example:

1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters.

2. Tinder is worse than IRL speed dating.

3. Duolingo is worse than language classes.

4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass.

5. Etc

It really makes me frustrated as someone who builds software and generally thinks it improves the world…

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#128

My doctor/'s office was just forced to switch to app-instead-of-website for patient interation. Ironically, the old and this new software came from same megacorp I work for (different department, same story). The old web interface was rather good and rather sensible-practical-sane. It was almost as if someone had asked a doctor what he actually needed for his patients, and then understood his answer and also managed…

At what point does this constitute a hostile action against the user and what degree of retaliation is appropriate? Open question for everyone.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#129
post #92

One thing not mentioned yet is what happens when you've got a cheaper phone filled with photos and videos. At various times I've had to spend a few minutes deleting things just to download some stupid 100 meg app that I need to use for a total of 5 minutes to complete some basic task.

Is your cheaper phone unable to interface with a computer? I'm no advocate of an app-based economy, but your phone shouldn't be the archive for your photos.

I back my photos up using adb backup, but I don't keep them in cloud services.

Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised

#130

My doctor/'s office was just forced to switch to app-instead-of-website for patient interation. Ironically, the old and this new software came from same megacorp I work for (different department, same story). The old web interface was rather good and rather sensible-practical-sane. It was almost as if someone had asked a doctor what he actually needed for his patients, and then understood his answer and also managed…

At what point does this constitute a hostile action against the user and what degree of retaliation is appropriate? Open question for everyone.

what retaliation are you imagining and against whom? who is even "the user" here?
Post reply on HN