[ipdashc]

> banking/insurance/whatever apps

I know banking apps are the typical example, but I've always wondered why. I use my bank's app maybe once or twice a year when I need to Zelle someone, which I only need to do when they don't have Venmo. (Unless we consider Venmo a banking app.)

I only have one bank's app installed, the rest of my banks I only interact with over their website, on desktop.

As for insurance, I've never had an insurance company's app installed.

Am I just an outlier here? Honestly, if I switched to a non standard OS, I'd be more annoyed about losing, say, Google Maps, Uber/Lyft, or various chat apps. Banking and insurance just don't come to mind at all as something I need my phone for.

[edent]

My bank sends me an alert when my card is used to make a transaction - handy for spotting fraud.

I get an alert when a payment comes it - handy for knowing if a client has paid.

I can quickly check my balance - handy for knowing if I can afford another round of drinks.

I can repay a friend in two taps - handy if they've paid for dinner.

Is anything essential? No. Is it something people use multiple times per day? Yes!

[Markoff]

I can get alerts in email or messages, no need dedicated app for that, I can track there also my balance, so only useful thing app provides are easy wire transfers from phone, which I never do, if I wanna transfer money is much more convenient work big display, proper keyboard and mouse than from phone.

[b00ty4breakfast]

We've cultivated a tech culture that can't stand the slightest inconvenience. People will give up nearly everything if it means avoiding the least bit of effort.

We are so boned

[raw_anon_1111]

So yes if it weren’t for people wanting convenience the “Year of Linux on the Desktop” would have happened 25 years ago.

What do you suggest? Everyone carry around their desktop computers and our CRT monitors like we did when we wanted to play Quake with friends?

[GaryBluto]

> What do you suggest? Everyone carry around their desktop computers and our CRT monitors like we did when we wanted to play Quake with friends?

The exercise would do people good. Jokes aside though, there is a nuance between completely inconvenient and designed for the marching morons.

[raw_anon_1111]

You mean 80% of adults worldwide are “morons”? Have you ever thought that they may know something you don’t know?

[b00ty4breakfast]

yes, getting emails or text messages instead of having app alerts is luddism.

Get real, dawg

[raw_anon_1111]

Uhh yes - when 90% of adults worldwide have moved to smart phones - yes you are the Luddite.

Email is for old people has been a meme for two decades

https://www.techdirt.com/2007/11/15/email-is-for-old-people/

[j_maffe]

That's great for you but unfortunately the overwhelming majority of people do indeed regularly use these features.

[raw_anon_1111]

You actually check your email regularly? How much effort does it really take to transfer a balance on a phone?

For Bank Of America it’s:

1. Click on “pay & transfer”

2. Click on “transfer”

3. Click on “From” and choose account

4. click on “to” and choose account

Then type in the amount and and click on the date?

Is it really that much easier on a computer?

[Markoff]

I use email corner with push, so I have emails instantly with notification to my smart watch, all my clients send me tasks through email

yes, especially the 4th point, the entering all the recipient's banking details on real keyboard is much more convenient than switching the windows and checking some microscopic numbers in PDF document on smartphone same copypasting them one by one between different fields (and yes, there are many companies which still don't provide QR code in their invoice)

[toyg]

The overwhelming majority of the population of the developed world now considers the mobile phone as their primary (and often only) computing device. It's always with them, it's more accessible and intuitive than a laptop, and it's how they communicate with everyone. It doesn't matter if you prefer to do this or that on a "real" computer - most people would just do everything through the phone if they could.

It's surprising how we still see posts like these in 2026 on what should be a "future-friendly" forum.

[cantalopes]

"if I wanna transfer money is much more convenient work big display, proper keyboard and mouse than from phone"

You realize how ridiculous this sounds, right?

[BreakingProd]

It reads like he made typos/autocorrect mistakes on his mobile phone!

Which is a pretty funny illustration of the gist of what he was saying… it’s easier to make mistakes on phones.

[Markoff]

yes, work=with

I'm not doing autocorrect typos when I type on computer keyboard, also banking on no gapps rooted phone would be kinda PITA

[firtoz]

Could all of these be handled through openbanking?

[xprnio]

Yes

[wilkystyle]

You're definitely not alone. I just checked the list of installed apps on my phone and found three different banking apps that I completely forgot about because I never use them. I installed them because I thought it would be convenient for checking things on the go, but I actually just end up using the computer whenever I need to do real banking business. The only finance-related app I use with any regularity is Venmo for e.g. paying back a friend for covering dinner.

Another commenter mentioned needing to get alerts for fraud, but none of the financial institutions i'm currently doing business with have any trouble sending me text messages. In fact I have the opposite problem, I can't get them to stop using text for 2FA codes...

[Aerroon]

2FA is a requirement in Europe. I can't log into my bank account without my phone being able to run the app.

[xprnio]

But 2FA is moot if it’s the same device as your bank app, is it not?

[rightbyte]

Yes. Please tell my bank that.

[LtWorf]

They know. The EU directive is quite clear that hw tokens are to be preferred over phones. Banks are cheap though and violate it.

[cuu508]

Switch bank.

[clhodapp]

It is in the specific case that you don't have biometric or PIN login set up on the device and you use a password manager that doesn't require authentication. In that case, the only factor is "something you have". Otherwise, it is still a multi-factor authentication because the device itself still represents "something you have", and your device unlock represents "something you know" or "something you are".

[naniwaduni]

Nearly all the security value of 1fa is that it keeps your users from picking the own passwords.

[hunterpayne]

The "app" is probably a web page written in JS. Rarely its a native app in either Kotlin or Swift but then you have to maintain 2 different apps in 2 different languages with 2 different OSes for the devs. So unless the app really specifically requires something special, its just a web page. Even (and especially) your banking app.

[dheera]

2FA and Google SafetyNet are two completely different things. Your banking app can implement 2FA without SafetyNet.

[heavyset_go]

It's Play Protect and Play Integrity now, not SafetyNet, in case anyone wants to look it up

[Markoff]

I would stop using bank requiring phone app to do banking, simple as that, both my main EU accounts use sms verification codes and extra password, which is fine with me. If they will require an app, they will lose customer.

[debazel]

So what are you going to do when all of them requires it?

[master-lincoln]

2fa does not mean smartphone. There are other variants too

[dheera]

I haven't had issues with the mobile apps of 3 of the most major US brokerages. They run fine on rooted phone. They do everything I'd want a bank to do anyway.

Ditch your bank if they have issues. If their retention department asks why you're leaving, tell them their app doesn't work.

[ipdashc]

> Ditch your bank if they have issues.

This is what I was thinking as well, TBH. I'm not particularly tied to any of my banks, I already did mostly switch off of BoA because their website was so bad.

Good to hear everyone's responses in the thread though, some stuff I definitely didn't consider.

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

"I'm am just an outlier here?"

No. The "banking app doesn't work" argument against non-corporate mobile OS, raised incessantly is HN comments, is bogus

I want a "phone", i.e., small form factor computer, that can run something like NetBSD, or Linux. But I have no intention of using it for commercial transactions. Mobile banking is not why I want to run a non-corporate OS

I want to use it for recreation, research and experimentation

NB. I have more than one "phone". The choice is not corporate mobile OS versus non-corporate mobile OS, i.e., "either-or". I can use both, each for specific purposes

[EvanAnderson]

> I want a "phone", i.e., small form factor computer, that can run something like NetBSD, or Linux. But I have no intention of using it for commercial transactions. Mobile banking is not why I want to run a non-corporate OS

> I want to use it for recreation, research and experimentation

I am a firm believer that phones are personal computers and should have all the end user freedom we have come to expect from personal computers. I am totally behind what your saying. (The amount of irrational anger that wells up in me when I hear someone make the argument that phones are somehow not general purpose personal computers and shouldn't provider their owners software freedom would astound you.)

Personally, I opt out of services that require the use of phone "apps" and any potential attestation they provide. Unfortunately, I just offload those needs onto my wife and her iPhone.

Want to go to a concert in a TicketMaster venue? You have to have a phone. Pay to park in some places requires a phone. Mobile ordering for some restaurants requires a phone.

I don't think it should be this way, but it is. I think we need consumer regulation to insure software freedom on phones and curtail awful user hostile "features" like remote attestation.

Until that happens (if it ever does) there is a realpolitik with needing corporate phones for some activities that can't be denied.

[kelvinjps10]

Those things that you mentioned you can do it on the website meaning also a open computer too

[JoshTriplett]

> Those things that you mentioned you can do it on the website

No, unfortunately some things can't be. There are venues that provide tickets exclusively via mobile applications, for instance.

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

"There are venues that provide tickets exclusively via mobile applications, for instance."

Turns out Ticketmaster still has ticket printing machines at such venues

Was at a game at one of them, claimed I had a problem with the app and after some negotiation at the ticket window a millennial printed me a ticket

Why do they still have the printers

The "I'm having a problem with the app" strategy can work in other contexts too. The phone can be configured so that a young person trying to help gives up

"Modern" software is highly fallible and everyone knows it

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

When people have problems using apps, alternatives are often available

Perhaps this is why, e.g., venues that "require" apps still have ticket printing machines and still print tickets when there are problems with using the apps

The situation is not so "cut and dried" that no one ever attends an event at these venues using printed tickets instead of displaying the ticket on the phones they bring to the event

There are alternatives to apps that are sometimes used, e.g., when customers have problems, even when businesses try to "require" apps

As such, businesses do not always succeed in collecting the same amount of data from every customer

This is not to say customers who try to avoid unnecessary data collection always succeed, either

Generally, trying is a prequisite to succeeding

If most customers do not try it does not mean no customer succeeds. There are some who do, at least some of the time

[EvanAnderson]

Ticketmaster is it's own particular problem that needs to be dealt with, even if it is emblematic of a bigger issue with companies demanding users to run proprietary software.

I have recent (October and November, 2025-- venues in Indianapolis, IN and Cincinnati, OH) personal experience with this. With one venue I was able to play the "confused old man" card (via phone) and get the box office to print my tickets and hold them at will call.

At another venue I called prior to my show and tried the same tactic. They told me flat out "no phone, no admittance, tough luck for you" and cited the warnings and terms on the Ticketmaster website that I'd already agreed-to. I didn't want to chance losing out on $300 of tickets I bought so I knuckled under and loaded the Ticketmaster app on my wife's iPhone.

I don't think it's as cut-and-dried as you say it is, and I don't have the stomach to risk being denied access to events I bought tickets for-- particularly at the pricing levels of today's shows.

[colordrops]

Well fuck those venues. It's a small percentage. I've never run into one and I live in LA, a city with hundreds if not thousands of venues.

So you only get 98% of the world instead of 100%. That 98% is far more than the the 100% of 10 years ago. Everyone wants perfection when they've already got abundance.

[EvanAnderson]

It has been reported that Ticketmaster has exclusive agreements with 70-80% of US venues. It's great that you have all the choices you do. For me, in western Ohio, every major venue for hundreds of miles in every direction is an exclusive Ticketmaster venue. You can't gain admittance to any show in those venues without a phone that can run their proprietary app.

Ticketmaster is bullshit, for sure, but they're just one example of the problem of being forced to use proprietary user-hostile software.

[raw_anon_1111]

So the world should cared to your needs when literally almost every adult has a phone even in third world countries?

Before you say “what about the poor people” in the US at least, even poor people can get a subsidized free phone through the UCF (?) government fund

Also see: no I’m not going to waste development time di you can get to a website I develop with JS disabled or so you can use lynx

[EvanAnderson]

> So the world should cared to your needs when literally almost every adult has a phone even in third world countries?

The assumption that everyone has a "smart phone" running locked-down Android or iOS is unreasonable. Just as race, sex, religion, national origin, etc, are protected classes, the "phoneless" should be a protected class. Denying people who choose not to use a locked down phone basic interaction with your business should be legally equivalent to posting a "No blacks allowed" sign on your door, and the consequences should be the same.

> Also see: no I’m not going to waste development time di you can get to a website I develop with JS disabled or so you can use lynx

I don't see what this non-sequitur has to do with the exchange. I didn't bring anything up about Javascript.

[raw_anon_1111]

Oh please, really? As a Black guy whose still living parents grew up in the segregated South. Comparing not being able to use a Linux phone to segregation is really taking it too far. You have not a single clue what it was like growing up in the Jim Crow South.

This conversation is officially done.

[kelvinjps10]

Because phones keep tracking us and stealing our attention.

And everybody should have the option of open computer systems

[raw_anon_1111]

So exactly how do you think an “open phone” will keep you from being tracked when you are tracked and can be triangulated via cell phone towers?

[olyjohn]

He's referring to his activity ON THE DEVICE. We know you can't stop the location tracking from the carrier. But that doesn't mean give up on everything else.

[deejaaymac]

The faraday bag I keep with me in my backpack!

[myth2018]

> I know banking apps are the typical example, but I've always wondered why

My bank uses the app for 2FA, and that became a sort of a standard in Brazil, AFAIK. Mine at least gave me the option of using an RSA SecurID or sth alike when I asked, but I don't know how much it would cost me.

My stock broker on the other hand does 2FA exclusively on mobile (and only Android and iOS). The same for the health insurer.

My car insurer didn't force me to so far, which I find strange, given their interest in tracking my location and speed.

These were some of the major factors leading me to give up on using a feature phone when I tried, a few years ago. It was a good experience, especially at those times of pandemics and political instability, but the inconveniences were many.

[avtolik]

Banks often use their app for a second factor auth. here.

[jaza]

My main bank is Commonwealth aka CBA (one of the "big 4" banks here in Australia). For a long time, I held out against installing their mobile app (on Android), and managed fine with their web UI (and with 2FA codes via SMS). Then, 2 or 3 years ago, I needed to start using PayID (sort-of Australia's version of Venmo, ie free instant transfers, except it's supported directly by all the major banks here). And I discovered that CBA had (deliberately?) only added PayID support to their mobile app, you absolutely can't use it in their web UI (last I checked). So I had to finally relent and install the mobile app. I started out only opening it on the rare occasions when I needed to send money to someone via PayID.

Then, a while later, CBA pretty much phased out SMS-based 2FA (or they said that if you had the mobile app installed then you can no longer use it?). Only other supported option is in-app 2FA (no support for third-party TOTP apps). So I had to start opening the mobile app every time I needed a 2FA code. Then, within the last year or so, they made a new rule, that in order to log in to the web UI at all (just initial login, I'm not talking about sending money or any other high-risk action), you had to receive a push notification via the mobile app and tap "allow". So now I literally can't log in to the web UI without also logging in to the mobile app!

So, unfortunately, "just keep using the bank's website on desktop" is increasingly and deliberately becoming not an option. I assume there are many similar stories with other banks around the world.

[elitistphoenix]

I paid someone via payid via the web ui. Was via an email address. It was a while ago though and haven't used it since. Also I've never used the app since the blocked rooted devices, magisk stopped working (cause of safetnet) and moved back to sms "security". I just logged in then without having to enter a code. I do note you need to allow browser fingerprinting to allow the login to work. Otherwise it's some generic error.

I've made a lot of noise about it so maybe they've "unblocked" me to shut me up. Email the CEO so it registers a complaint. Make some noise. Definitely have another bank though as you can't just depend on one.

[severino]

So, leaving aside the discussion about whether someone wants to use their bank's application or not, what's the bank response if their application just doesn't work in your phone? That you must purchase a new phone or be locked out of using your account?

I hope, now that the debate about our excessive reliance on American tech is on the table, that we also put limits on those essential services, like banks, imposing the usage of products from only two companies (Google or Apple) in order to operate. I think that goes at least against the spirit of the European Union.

[hunterpayne]

> I hope, now that the debate about our excessive reliance on American tech is on the table

LOL, you couldn't even place a phone call in Australia without some US technology connecting the call. I should know, we setup the app that calculates your bill. That's from the US too.

[habinero]

As a fellow American, can you not?

[jesterson]

Country dependent of course, but recently i observe steady push from banks to adopt mobile app. Some have webui neglected and glitchy, some openly announce sunsetting, some already killed web access only allowing app.

And this tendency will prevail as bank can collect way more data this way. Just a month ago one of banks that is often praised here sent me a letter saying “your IP activity doesn’t match your residence” (and i am not even installed their app, they pulled data from web ui usage. Imagine what happens when they get access to data mobile app can supply

[marcosdumay]

> I know banking apps are the typical example, but I've always wondered why.

It's because Google created this thing during backroom conversations with bank associations from a handful of countries.

[WhyNotHugo]

Sounds like you’re using Venmo to fill the same role as a banking app (sending and receiving bank transfers).

Many other countries simply rely on banking apps for these things, and don’t have a separate service for this kind of transaction.

Here in NL many banks (not all) require their iOS or Google app to log into their home banking on a PC/browser.

[noughtnaut]

Fair point - but then take national eID apps instead.

Take Denmark, for example: most banking apps use eID for login, so that problem translates 1:1. But other apps who do the same include the national school communications platform (which is pretty much mandatory for a huge chunk of the adult population, who need to look at it almost daily). Also: social security card (including health portal/doctor booking/comms), driver's license, bus pass, parking app, used-stuff-marketplace, ... eID is _everywhere_ because it's a good idea.

Sure, all of this can be done on a computer. If you're near one. Or you can have separate and physical cards, like we used to have. That still works, mostly: more and more services (eg. bus pass) are going digital-only.

Really, what we need is a top-down embrace of open-source-based platforms as being _as_ (or more) secure than the established tech giants. From governments down, organisations _should_ move away from locked-down (foreign) commercial interests.

I'm not holding my breath though.

[nicoburns]

Some banks' only interface is the mobile app. And in Europe people typically use their banking app for P2P payments (no need for an app like Venmo)

[duskdozer]

Have you not had a company block you from doing something on the web and force you to use an app for it?

[BenjiWiebe]

I can't deposit checks over the website, and I use a bank with no physical locations near me.

[nradov]

That's true, but the notion that we're still using paper checks in 2026 is so crazy. And yet they remain the cheapest way to handle many transactions in the US financial system. Like a lot of small healthcare providers still prefer to receive paper checks from insurance companies because the electronic payment processors take a 3% fee.

[hermanzegerman]

Why won't they just use Bank Transfers? Using Checks or Credit Cards for Payments between companies sounds completely insane and stupid

[nradov]

Yes, it is completely insane and stupid. Direct bank-to-bank transfers require significant administrative work to set up, and may still incur bank fees. For individual consumer accounts most people can use Zelle but it's not universally available.

[Synaesthesia]

Funny how South Africa has a way more sophisticated banking network than the USA.

[hermanzegerman]

I think nearly every other country has instant and free/low-cost bank transfers, without relying on some Apps.

I haven't seen a cheque my entire life, and I'm born in the last century