could you give some exapmples on how it limits the use of your device?
while i agree with you, i seem to lack the imagination to come up with realistic examples that i can present as arguments.
i am afraid anything i think of would get a response like "yeah, sure, but noone uses their phone like that" or they'll simply accuse me of being paranoid.
> could you give some exapmples on how it limits the use of your device?
Forcing me to use a smartphone app means I can't use a normal desktop or laptop computer, or even a non-Android, non-IOS smartphone. It means that institutions that provide a semi-public utility (e.g., banks) force people to support and agree with the terms of use supplied by a (foreign) megacorporation to function as a citizen in the digital realm. That is inherently undemocratic and a threat to our freedoms.
Expecting the vast majority of citizens to have access to a computing device with a modern web browser is somewhat reasonable (as long as those who can't are supported by other means). You can at least choose what software you run, and there are free software options available. With smartphone apps (well-built web applications excluded) that freedom does not exist.
I do not want proprietary software nor I want to depend on black boxes to use a service. So if a bank, a public administration etc demand using proprietary stuff that does not came from them they force their customers to buy such black boxes and suffer all their limitations.
For instance I hate in the same way countries that ask users to install proprietary crappy software's to pay taxes instead simple pdfs/standard WebUI.
while i agree with you, i seem to lack the imagination to come up with realistic examples that i can present as arguments.
i am afraid anything i think of would get a response like "yeah, sure, but noone uses their phone like that" or they'll simply accuse me of being paranoid.