No it means I’ve got to install a junk app for every individual carpark I use that uses their own app.

If flushing the toilet without an app would suddenly require you to walk across campus to obtain a one-time-use Toilet Flushing Override Token (and no, you can't ask for multiple ones - no "hoarding" allowed!), there would be riots on introduction - and rightfully so! The fact that an app has to exist at all is a symptom of a systemic issue.

Same with parking. ANPR cameras are ancient technology, and many commercial lots already have tap-to-pay at the exit barrier. Or even the entry barrier, for fixed-price parking. Even the complicated cases have you enter your vehicle registration on the payment terminal these days, rather than messing around with paper passes. In this world it should not be complicated to handle employee parking with a one-off license plate registration on some intranet web page, or just allow tapping your employee badge at the parking barrier. Worst-case scenario they'd hand you an EZPass-like RFID tag during onboarding to put behind your car's windscreen.

The toilet-flushing app should not have to exist. It is the ultimate embodiment of institutional "we have tried nothing, and are all out of ideas". Accepting deeply-flawed workarounds for non-problems should not be a normal part of your day-to-day life.

Well, yes, that’s exactly my point. It’s not the case with parking, so the analogy breaks down.

There are no incentives for them to make a proper app. When faced with a choice of being nice to you or extracting maximum value out of you, those companies will pick the second option every time. Having an internet-connected app is an open invitation for companies to force you to register an account, make you grant their app all sorts of permissions, have you view ads and waste your money. Another incentive is for them to save as much money on developing that app as they can. Combining these two, we get a situation where any company that's not squeezing you for those few extra cents is making an economically inferior choice, and anything digital and connected to the internet has no bounds for how many types of abusive practices can be facilitated through it.

On the other hand, paying at a parking meter is physical and grounded in reality, you can't inject too much bullshit into the process. It's very constrained and you know it will always remain so. They don't have wiggle room to try any of the above. It's boring 20th century 'exchanging money for services' instead of new 21st century 'abusing the user for money and potentially providing a service on the side'.