Taking 2FA as it stands, I am happy with it.
It seems to me that the greater the number or variety of channels of communication, the better; even to the extent of using the voice telephone to confirm details.
2FA isn't the problem that I perceive.
It is the availability of a second technology ("Save your logon details?") that seems to me to be in conflict with the idea of 2FA (protect your ability to login?") that raises a red flag to my eyes.
2FA makes it more difficult for anyone else to log in.
"Save details" makes it less difficult for anyone else to log in.
Each person has different requirements for security.
My requirements are different from yours (because we are different people!)
When I made extensive use of cafes and libraries for online access, or when I worked in a corporate headquarters, I was more concerned about security than I am now.
Perhaps I should consider this as a spectrum of security.
At my end is very low security: an Encrypted data partition, but a wide-open laptop apart from that. Any stranger can walk into my house and start using the web.
At the far end is how I used to be when I had gigabytes of confidential client projects sitting on my computers.
Each "wall of security" from Windows login through decryption login through stored bookmarks, stored passwords etc is another hurdle for Billy Burglar to work through. Same thing, in truth, with my electricity bill. Four wooden doors are closed between where I sit and The Great Outdoors, because we are in mid-winter. As summer approaches more doors are opened until by summertime (August 6th through 13th) I am, in effect, working outside.
'Twould be interesting to read what online banking technicians feel about "Save your login?"