People are writing this off, but it eventually becomes impossible not to own a smartphone; an expensive device, with an expensive monthly plan, and an absolutely terrible privacy record. Eventually more businesses will require smartphone usage just to use their services. There could even be a time when government services require it.
'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
151–160 of 870 posts
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That doesn’t solve the problem of having to spend time deleting photos and later restoring them back from the archive.
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#153Here’s hoping this doesn’t change!
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#154I have a big issue with this, and the truth is that the majority of people simply do not care and/or do not understand the implications. By tying your service to a smartphone your are basically refusing to provide service if the costumer doesn't agree to Apple's or Google's TOS. If the app doesn't complain about emulation or something different than Android or IOS you are in luck, but that's not the case with most ba…
Sure, I own a smartphone, it runs just plain android but without any google accounts or services because I do not agree to Googles terms of services. I never did, and as an European citizen especially with recent developments I feel that has been the right choice.
The thing is, without google account there is no play store, and without play store I am not able to install the majority of apps - no banking, no parking, and all the other services people complain about in these threads.
This is my choice, and I stick to it. I'm also pretty vocal about it and complain when needed. Doctors office informs me I only can get medicine with the app? Apparently they can make exceptions when you complain, because I'm allowed to get medicine with a simple phone call. My bank tried to force me to use their app, but apparently they still do have an alternative login method when you complain. Sure, I know it's a fight I will lose in the long run, but I enjoy it while it lasts.
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depending on where you live, a smartphone can be bought for 100 bucks and a basic line (voice, messages, 2GB of data) for less than 5 bucks. It's not ideal but it's not a sacrifice anymore.
You can also use wifi. Even free wifi. You can get a very nice used phone with many years of updates for 100 dollars. You can find a worse phone for much less if you really want to. edit: You can even get a free phone from your community. Possibly a better one than the a53. Most people have a phone or several in a drawer. https://swappa.com/listings/samsung-galaxy-a53-5g?carrier=un...
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#156I’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…
> 1. Parking apps are worse than parking meters. I certainly don't agree with that one. I really don't miss having to pay for a fixed number of hours and then having to figure out what to do if I'm running late (or wasting money if I get back early). > 4. Airline apps that are worse than just printing a boarding pass. Unless the app is exceptionally horrible you can just export it to Apple/Android wallet which is muc…
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#157My 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…
I also stopped signing anything in the waiting room.
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#158Government services are a different case. I suppose they feel cost pressure as well, but it's right to expect them to accommodate more people than private businesses.
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
> who is even "the user" here?
The doctors and their patients. If it's as bad as it sounds, it actively degrades the ability of doctors to provide care, so it quite literally hurts actual people.
Re: 'The tyranny of apps': those without smartphones are unfairly penalised
#160I 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 depende…