Don't Download Apps
51 comments
·November 26, 2025mmcclure
georgefrowny
I'm convinced many companies purposely gimp their web sites to drive people to apps.
Uber for example doesn't seem to work from my phone browser.
What surprises me is how many engineers must be involved in this kind of scummy shit and keep it tightly under wraps.
grvdrm
Instagram - major offender.
6c696e7578
I would say use flickr, but that's shitified now.
tifik
I was wondering if it's just me. I am using Brave on iOS with all the possible blockers enabled, so I'm not surprised when some website doesn't work well. Instagram literally freezes solid after 5-15s of being on the website, so I usually only quickly scan the top 2-3 posts in the feed. I only follow people I know personally, so this is usually enough to do once or twice a day and stay up to date. If I see a close friend posted a story I kinda want to see then it usually takes two or three hard closes of the browser to actually see it. Sucks, but sucks less than being mental gamed into doomscrolling every time I get an app notification.
chipheat
Oddly effectively because I end up using it less in general
wffurr
When someone sends me an Instagram link I edit to imginn.com instead.
jsheard
> I'm convinced many companies purposely gimp their web sites to drive people to apps.
And then their app is just a webview wrapper. But that gives them more access to your device.
jbombadil
100% agree. The level of tracking has gotten to absurd levels.
I needed a couple of grocery items and happened to be next to an Amazon Fresh. Cool, let’s try it! Went in, found every tu ing I needed and went to self checkout. When it was time to pay, the machine wouldn’t accept my Apple Pay. I ask an employee who helpfully informs me that I can pay with physical cards or my Amazon account.
I didn’t have my physical cards, nor wanted to do my Amazon account so I had to leave. Why don’t they accept Apple Pay? Because they can’t track you. If you use a physical card, they can likely link that card number to an Amazon account and thus attribute the purchase to a person. If you pay with contactless payment they get a one time token that they can’t tie to anyone.
aduitsis
IIUC, contactless payment via apple pay does have a secondary card number of sorts that's linked to your original card.
I once accidentally paid for AppleCare with apple pay (a mistake), so when at some point I switched phones I had to get new secondary card numbers tied to my physical cards. The old secondaries went away when I wiped my old phone, so AppleCare was no longer able to draw the monthly payment. The number in the invoice was likewise not the original physical card number, but some other number.
Whether the secondary numbers are easier or impossible to track is certainly a question, but I believe there's always a number.
phyzome
In Massachusetts, they also would have been required to accept cash, as all business locations are.
(It appears that Amazon Fresh has not opened any locations in MA. That's fine with me.)
StilesCrisis
Walmart is the same. I believe it's very very slightly more expensive to process Apple Pay payments (Apple's getting a tiny fractional amount of the sale), and this was the actual sticking point.
dylan604
Walmart rolled out their own QR code payment plan just so they didn't have to revshare anything. When you're the size of Walmart, you can get away with those types of decisions even though they are technically very much inferior
paulddraper
> Why don’t they accept Apple Pay?
Apple charges for the interchange.
This is the same reason that Walmart doesn’t accept it.
raw_anon_1111
Every credit card company charges interchange fees. Apple charges an additional .15 cents.
Walmart doesn’t accept Apple Pay because they want you to use their app and think they are big enough not to.
piperswe
No, they don't. Apple isn't involved with the transaction processing at all, the phone just acts as an EMV device to transmit the payment details to the terminal.
xiaomai
Native phone apps give me the creeps. I assume the developer's are able to track me in various ways even without my giving permissions. Is that an unfounded fear on my part?
Can an app uniquely identify me if I don't give it control over my phone number / nearby devices?
Can apps geo-locate me if the location permission has not been granted? (seems like they could just make a network request to their servers and use the IP address of the request for a rough idea).
I _really_ wish using the network was a permission (even if it was an "advanced mode" thing).
Flere-Imsaho
Android 15 supports Private Space [0] that is essentially a separate profile you can install apps into that you can put to sleep. Basically I put all low trust apps into it, but can still access easily enough.
[0] https://support.google.com/android/answer/15341885?hl=en
jampa
In the beginning of Android / iOS, just installing an app and registering was enough for the company to get your device's MAC address and thus your indoor location with accurate precision.
They could access your Wi-Fi network's BSSID (whose location is often public due to wardriving databases), and in public places, they had partner companies (malls, airports, etc.) whose routers would triangulate your position based on Wi-Fi signal strength and share information like "John is in the food court near McDonald's."
All of this happened without you even needing to connect to their Wi-Fi, because your phone used to broadcast its MAC address if the Wi-Fi was simply on. But now your MAC is now randomized, but it took a lot of time for Google / Apple to this.
ChrisMarshallNY
iOS always asks for permissions. I suspect the same is true for unrooted Android.
But the general pattern is that you install some stupid vendor crapplet, and the first thing it does, is ask for every permission on your phone. Native apps can access a lot more stuff than ones restricted to a WebView sandbox. That's why they want you to use them.
No thankee.
throw4039
Network is a permission on Android, it's just that phone manufacturers and likely Google don't want you to be able to control it. Most custom ROMs, including GrapheneOS expose it properly, often at the install dialog.
TrianguloY
On play store you can see the permissions that an app uses and they are grouped by category. Have full network access is set in the "others" category, same as notifications and vibration. This is a category where (supposedly) permissions are automatically granted.
But to be honest, other similar dangerous permissions like "view network connections" and "receive data from internet" are also there, categories are for "camera", "microphone" etc.
I suppose that the average user is more concerned about specific features, and since basically almost all apps require internet it may be there to avoid noise. Still, an "internet" category would have been nice...
lsaferite
They really should just let me spoof all the permissions and associated data for apps if I don't want them to have the access.
snthd
Facebook & Yandex used apps to correlate browsing sessions to the app user.
frizlab
They can track you on a website perhaps even more reliably than on an app, at least on iOS…
galleywest200
The difference is I am not carrying around my desktop computer, the location data stays static.
noman-land
Simply your IP address can be used to track you so any app or website you visit knows roughly where you are with every http request unless you use an always on VPN. It can also fingerprint you in various ways without the need for any special permissions.
xiaomai
Agree with you about fingerprinting (also a bummer). I guess the difference here though is that I must be actively engaging with a website in order for it to be tracking me, but an app (I assume) can be tracking me basically whenever it wants.
bji9jhff
Then the VPN provider does geolocation instead and get the list of hosts you accessed
disambiguation
Netguard solves this, available on the play store and F droid
n4bz0r
How does it work without root? Any app can just block other apps from connecting to the internet?
Flere-Imsaho
Pro tip: use the fdroid version as it allows you to set a host file to also filter ads, etc.
lsaferite
I love netguard. Some apps refuse to work without network access, but most work fine. The lack of ads is great.
nerdponx
[delayed]
jamesbelchamber
I've been dutifully following this approach for a little while now and it's had the nice side effect of pushing me to smaller and more local options.
I think it's also saving me money!
VerifiedReports
Giving your phone number is just as bad. I was buying stuff at World Market and they had big signs touting 20% off some things... but when you got the counter they told you didn't get that unless you coughed up your real working mobile number so you could receive some BS code.
See ya, jerks.
chitza
"never hand your phone over the counter" - do people actually hand over their phones to random strangers? I'd never do that unless I really know the person
jasonjmcghee
Occasionally restaurants to pay for something if you don't have a credit card. But never had them go take it somewhere.
sholain
We need strong regulation.
jovial_cavalier
Generally agree with the sentiment, I basically only have banking apps, messaging apps, and a browser on my phone.
I am skeptical, though, of the price discrimination claims. If McDonald's decides that the right price of a Big Mac for me is $1 and for you $4, that creates an arbitrage opportunity. You can pay me $3, and I pocket $1.50. The result is that I buy more big macs, and they bump my price up. You buy less, and they take your price down. Now it just trades at the market rate it was before, but with more steps.
encom
An annoying trend I've noticed is being asked for phone number or email at checkout (IRL). I bought a blood pressure meter a few days ago, and the salesman asked "what phone number should I put on the order?" Zero. Fuck off. I guess most people just answer out of reflex, or believe it's required to complete the purchase. It's creepy and irritating.
didgetmaster
I often use my old landline number when stores ask me for a phone number. I gave it up about 20 years ago. I feel a little sorry for the guy who has it now (only a little sorry) because whoever it was reassigned to, probably gets many spam calls on my behalf.
raw_anon_1111
This has been a thing since the 1990s when I worked at Radio Shack.
kirtakat
[Your Area Code]-867-5309 is what I always use - alas they are becoming wise to that
dylan604
[areaCode]-555-1212 is one I use, but any 555 prefix will work as it is not meant for actual phone numbers.
phyzome
I've used 213-456-7890 a few times on throwaway things.
gishh
“Can I have your phone number for this order?”
“Nope.”
Already pisses me off that companies make a profile of me based on credit card numbers. I’ve had this number for decades. I’m sure you could build a complete profile of me based on my cell number, and this is the only “social” site I use. I got off fb in 2008, never even joined the rest (twitter, insta, reddit, et. al.) just because my phone number has been raped out of anyone else who has my name and number in their phone.
raw_anon_1111
This is dumb. Websites have many more ways to track you across websites than apps have to track you if you don’t explicitly give them unnecessary permissions.
I switched to using PWAs for social media apps for similar reasons the author outlines. A pleasant, but somewhat unintended consequence is that I just use them a lot less because the experience is pretty bad. It makes me a little sad because I’ve always believed in the PWA dream, but the reality is that they’re bad because companies certainly don’t want to make an experience that rivals the app they really want you to download.
Expected, but just leads to reinforcing the idea that PWAs won’t ever be as good when every one people try from someone with a popular app is so awful.