> You're - literally - on "Hacker News" complaining about the lack of a product. You were given one that you could easily fix to suit your aforementioned needs/demands and was a principal complaint against BankId but, instead, you want BankId to write the Linux app for you because... ...profits? This makes no sense; especially, when you would already have a hefty baseline of code to work with.

That's like saying jailbreaking makes iOS respect the consumer. It's a temporary hack that makes it tolerable to use... for a few days until the next mandatory update comes out and breaks everything again.

You won't get lasting improvement without changing the mindset of the powers that be.

> Does not automatically doesn't - implicitly - mean that it's disallowed. You seem to be confusing the two concepts, here.

You're saying service developers can put in the work to support both desktop and mobile BankID. I'm saying most of them are lazy and don't bother. Those two statements are not incompatible.

> We're - literally - talking about the API being the same because you made it a point that it was different. Either it matters or it doesn't. Pick one.

Similar and compatible are very different things.

Then again, this whole subdiscussion is irrelevant anyway, because desktop BankID is still crap for the same reasons as Mobile BankID.

> O.k.? We're still in the swamplands of those are problems created by the app developers and not BankId, correct..? I'm not sure I'm following how the app designers' decisions are the fault of BankId...

If BankID had spent more than two seconds designing their API boundaries then the app developers wouldn't have had to care about supporting both in the first place.