Apple shouldn't be allowed to boss people in the payments space around. They shouldn't even be in payments. They're a computer device.
Apple is blurring all the lines and attempting to put everything under the Apple umbrella of products. If 50% of people use an iPhone, then by Apple's logic, 50% of all commerce and transactions can be taxed by Apple at every ingress and egress.
This isn't fair and Apple needs to be shut down in this effort.
Apple should have nothing to do with payments, and I hope the EU rips them a new one. We need to do the same back at home.
Apple should give everyone equal access, no special deals with special companies to access private APIs.
If an Apple application can access an API then this API should be accessible to competitors.
I am expecting some comment asking about security, the answer is Apple should have the money and talent to handle this(though with latest reveals security needs more attention). Applications can access your clipboard, your files, your photos , you tell the user that say "This Sudoku game wants access to your photos" and the user should answer but it would be even a better experience if the review process would actually work on those dudes won't just complain about links colors and other superficial shit.
Imagine your reaction if "Only Microsoft can create antivirus,firewall, browser,VM software for Windows because security and think about my mom)
Depends on the history, doesn't it? If Smart TVs started off with multiple built in browsers and options to even add your own, but now only allow the manufacturer's choice, that would be a problem.
But they started off with one option and that was it.
None of this is as simple as "everyone gets everything no matter the context or cost".
The reality is that the group can decide that something that was legal before is no longer legal. I don't think there is a need for a new law, existing ones will be sufficient to show that Apple causes harm to consumers and the market. Even in US apple just lost a trail about payments, though it will be appealed I think the days for Apple having a payment monopoly on iOS and not allowing you to show a link to your website to buy directly are numbered. But I expect tsomeone to also claim that is Apple duty to delay that day and make more money for the shareholders.
Fully agree. The monopoly that is apple payments needs to be stopped. It's kind of shocking how many apple fanboys there are on HN that see nothing wrong with this.
I would hazard a guess that it’s less fanboyism and more cynicism towards and lack of trust in the software makers that would be creating competition. A big selling point of Apple platforms has been a unified experience that acts an escape from much of the nonsense brought by those software makers.
In my mind the fact that support for opening up iPhones and the like isn’t unilateral is something of an indictment of the larger state of the software world. When users are actively seeking a walled garden as a form of shelter, you know something with the surrounding world is messed up pretty badly. Yes Apple needs to do better, but so do the overwhelming majority of companies putting out any kind of software.
Instead of screaming “fanboys”, please try to recall how horrible the payment platforms were before, in Sweden it was the literal dark ages before Apple Pay with banks and other vendors trying to force the most obscure and user hostile solutions they could come up with.
Samsung Pay was of course another solution, but they didn’t consider security to be an important part of the design, at least not initially.
If every iPhone is going to be a gateway for terrible payment solutions we’re in it for a world of hurt (forget wallets, one app and one custom solution per store, or more, will be the norm).
Not sure what you're talking about. I've been extremely happy with the dutch national payment system ideal for over a decade. I will refuse to use anything else, it is what everything and everyone in my country uses, and it works great. Apple pay just redirects to it, anyway. No sense letting them take their cut for not doing anything of value.
I don't want a wallet. I just want to send money from my bank account, and this is already a solved problem which apple has no business getting their nose in.
People tend to have more requirements than you do for payments, my bank doesn’t even offer minute info on transactions or full payment info until two days later, I have it on the second in my phone.
I also don’t want to carry around plastic cards for no good reason.
ApplePay is opt-in btw, so it’s not like you’re forced to use it. It’s an extremely good user product, far exceeding anything else we’ve had available in my country.
Sounds like your country happens to have a particularly poor implementation of a national payment system, which has biased you into thinking Apple is somehow the only company on earth who is able to make a decent payment system.
Unfortunately for Apple that is not the case. With ideal, which again has been around for more than a decade, payments are instant and secure. Everyone has been using it for a decade. Works great! No need to pay apple 30%, and yet they demand it.
ApplePay doesn’t have a 30% cut on transactions, no bank in world would touch them if that were the case.
So does your country provide phones that also serves as payment solutions or is it still plastic cards? Or are you suggesting everyone should get a free ride on Apple?
“Payments are done using the mobile banking app or the online banking environment of your own bank. “ that’s from the ideal webpage, we’ve had solutions like that for a while too, that’s not why people want ApplePay, it’s for payments in stores or online (without jumping through hoops), not bank account transfers.
Ideal also have that terrible QR code madness where you have to scan it with an app, that’s the dark ages, luckily those systems failed miserably here.
They should have nothing to do with payments? And yet their first product is so vastly superior and more secure than any product offered by banks or card providers, tell me how keeping the status quo with plastic cards is better.
I think Wells Fargo actually did used to have their own Android Pay alternative within their own app, but they've discontinued it, and now you have to add their cards directly into Google Pay.
If you go into "Settings", "Apps & notifications", "Advanced": "Default apps", "Tap & pay", then you can select either "Google Pay" or another app that you may have. I think "Wells Fargo" app used to show up there back when they supported contactless within their app.
This seems to be almost universal for banking apps. Aside from those of some of the huge national banks, in the US bank apps tend to be lowest-bidder barely functional junk.
The AMEX app supposedly can use it, although the problem then becomes finding shops that support it. After a while I just ended up adding the card to Google Pay, which seems more reliable.
Banks want to "own the customer" by providing their own "differentiated" UX. What they only realize later is that they can't develop UX that's competitive with Apple or Google.
Barclay's implementation of it may be awful, but I'd much rather use a bank's implementation directly than give Google direct access to information about all of my transactions.
Yes, one of my banks does support using my CC for payment by NFC for Android 5.0 and up. I remember this because I'm annoyed that they don't support Apple Pay.
That said, I've seen exactly once someone using and Android phone to pay contactless. It was a huge pain, they tried multiple times.
Samsung Pay's Magnetic Stripe Emulation is much cooler, it's like magic. Unfortunately, magnetic stripes are a legacy tech.
I use my banks own android app to add my cards and pay via nfc on android. I live in an EU country where android pay is not available. Therefore yes android allows it.
When Animal Crossing on the Switch took off last year, I heard of some nefarious characters who would use Android phones with NFC capability to write Amiibo (Nintendo toys-to-life products) data to NFC tags, then use those tags in game. Such a thing is only possible when the manufacturer allows the user to utilize the hardware they purchased.
It's a bit like Ford selling a v6 Mustang with 4 functional cylinders and a switch on the dashboard that enables the other two but you're not allowed to flip the switch unless you send Ford $$$.
Nintendo could have easily prevented copying tags by writing a signature based on the tag's MAC to the data on the tag itself. The Switch would just read the tag, generate a signature and compare it to the data read.
I'm being facetious, in a humorous attempt to deflect any criticism against piracy. Nintendo sold Amiibo cards in blind packs, then later discontinued them. Some of those cards are rare and sought after. I have no problem with people downloading a few hundreds bytes of data to unlock parts of software they already paid for.
Nothing to detract from your point, but I just want to reinforce in general to anyone reading this that cloning an NFC tag is very likely not piracy.
An NFC code isn't a creative work that can be copyrighted, and it's a stretch to call an NFC tag a DRM system. IANAL, but I suspect that Nintendo would have a hard time arguing in a court that aftermarket Amiibo cards are doing anything illegal at all (of course, provided those cards don't violate trademark or have copyrighted graphics/characters printed on them).
Subtlety is lost in text, and wasted on the technically-minded.
> the locked content is taking up storage space
Modders noticed unknown amiibo codes in the Wii U version of Breath of the Wild version and were able to create tags months before the amiibos were actually released. So in this case the locked content is released earlier than designed.
How is that "nefarious"? It's not like using a copy nfc tag is giving some players an unfair competitive edge (animal crossing is supposed to be laidback right?). Also, there is a limited supply of any given amiibo and so when one suddenly becomes popular (* cough * Ankha * cough *) many players get priced out.
Apple should not be required to handle 3rd party agreements with commensurate compensation. But they should also not own the market. Tough position to strike.
As an EU citizen. I think EU antitrust is fighting good fight for the people.
European Union antitrust enforcement has support of may civil liberty and privacy organizations and political parties. Their main complaint is that they are not doing enough.
Vestager fights a popular fight, but she fights it badly. Almost everything significant she has tried to do has been blocked by courts or settled away. She’s Europe’s Eliot Spitzer.
> Nothing gets better by installing Apple as a gatekeeper
Eh, privacy. A bit. The reason banks want you to use their app is they can collect more data than Apple passes along. I also doubt contactless payment would have the adoption it has among iOS users without Apple’s branding and marketing push.
> The reason banks want you to use their app is they can collect more data than Apple passes along.
There’s incredibly strict laws around banking privacy in NL (and most of the EU). My banks can’t even mine my transactions for any inference, except fraud. They need my approval to even categorize or track spending.
Your privacy actively decreases by switching from pretty much anything to Apple services. At least if Microsoft or Google is at the wheel you can count on their incompetence: Apple's collusion with the American government is well-documented at this point, and a reasonable security threat to anyone located outside of the United States. It should be assumed that the NSA has access to every iMessage conversation ever held (otherwise, why would Apple even generate a key for themselves?), and that your device is constantly spying on you, waiting for a single discrepancy that it can report home.
Frankly, if Apple's the alternative, I'd rather roll my own security. I have no interest in wasting my time trying to pick the lock on my golden handcuffs just to use my computer without being watched.
> otherwise, why would Apple even generate a key for themselves?
"For Messages in iCloud, if you have iCloud Backup turned on, your backup includes a copy of the key protecting your messages. This ensures you can recover your messages if you lose access to your Keychain and your trusted devices. When you turn off iCloud Backup, a new key is generated on your device to protect future messages and isn't stored by Apple." https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202303
The Snowden leaks indicate the two alternatives you suggest, Google and Microsoft, joined PRISM before Apple did, stating "98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
>Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping of this nature, to the point of getting in a public fight with the FBI over it.
Eh, that was 2016.
Half a decade later and Apple has since kowtowed to the Chinese government to allow spying on iCloud user data. Despite their privacy-centric branding campaigns, Profits >> Privacy for Apple.
That's the standard Chinese setup - Google and Microsoft aren't going to be allowed to do any differently there - and only for Chinese users. I'd expect it to be entirely firewalled off from the rest of Apple's infrastructure. (Microsoft similarly has datacenters there, with the same legal requirements. Google only pulled out over bad PR, IMO.)
If you're a Chinese citizen, you're surveilled by the Chinese government, regardless of which device you buy.
Except it is a complete 180 from the claim "Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping", because Apple hasn't. That whole article is about how Apple is giving in more and more to demands of the Chinese government.
Google faced the same with project Dragonfly and employees chose to not kowtow to Chinese government spying.
Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software.
The claim made upthread that I was responding to was "Apple's collusion with the American government is well-documented at this point" specifically; I said "fairly resistant", too, not "100% perfectly resistant".
Unless I become a Chinese citizen/resident, Apple's dealings with China don't particularly concern me much.
> Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software
Apple had a choice, and those chose to be able to operate in Chinese markets (including for manufacturing) over blatantly breaking Chinese law.
Apple's fight with the FBI over the San Bernardino shooter phone instance was made possible by them having legal recourse in the US to do so. Remember that Apple is only a corporation because the government allows them to be one.
The legality isn't relevant to choosing to kowtow to government spying. It would have also been legal for Google to operate project Dragonfly, but they chose user privacy instead.
You say kowtow, I say keep essential manufacturing going.
Upset the CCP enough, you might not even get parts out of China to assemble elsewhere. Perhaps why Apple has invested in having multiple sources for all of their components, multiple manufacturing facilities in different countries, etc.
Literally yesterday people were railing against Netflix for not integrating into Apple TV search, and not being willing to give their competitor (TV+) insights into their customer viewing history.
> I also doubt contactless payment would have the adoption it has among iOS users without Apple’s branding and marketing push.
Maybe in the US. But hear in the EU contactless was a thing a decade before Apple Pay came along, and just about every merchant and bank card supported it for at least 5 years before Apple Pay.
Indeed I would say that Apple Pay wouldn’t have the adoption it does in the EU, if it wasn't for contactless providing all the infrastructure needed to power it. A point you can provide evidence for my comparing Apple Pay adoption in the US vs EU.
On your privacy point, you realise that banks get same amount of data about a transaction via the card networks, regardless of whether or not you use Apple Pay. The only party that looses any info is the merchant.
> banks get same amount of data about a transaction via the card networks, regardless of whether or not you use Apple Pay
I don’t know the situation in the EU, given the privacy laws, but in the U.S., banks’ enhanced data from app-based contactless payments (on Android, obviously) sell at a premium to those through a scrubbed channel. The app picks up a lot more information, e.g. signals, location, device, clipboard, et cetera, than the payment transcript.
Those apps for the most part don’t really exist in the EU. I suspect a big reason is due the the hard caps on card network interchange fees. So the size of the transaction pie is smaller, and banks get a larger proportion of the pie than their US counterparts.
In the US theres a very clear financial incentive for banks to try and cut out card networks, and claim their portion of the fees. The hard part then is convincing merchants to invest the time and money needed to support these new payment systems. Hence the significant carrot of providing customer data to merchants.
In the EU, the banks wouldn’t make a significant saving by cutting out the card networks. So it not clear how they would fund the incentives needed to get merchants to support their new systems. All of those provides a barrier to bank payment apps (for C2B payments, C2C payments all happen through normal bank apps), before you even bring privacy into the equation, which just makes a bank payment system even less appealing to merchants.
Having said all of that, open banking in the EU is creating new opportunities for merchants and banks to skip card networks, especially for online payments. So it'll be interesting to see how that ecosystem evolves over time.
Exactly. Perhaps they went with the 8 card limit because they didn't expect that it'll be as popular in the US, and you don't hear that many complaints about it because:
* People in Europe who use contactless all the time rarely have as many cards as some Americans.
* Americans who have that many cards rarely use contactless.
Perhaps I am an outlier for actually using all my cards contactless.
It's less about keeping the existing power hierarchy and more about preventing Apple from forcibly restricting channels or stifling any and all competition.
What if the iPhone 14 was SIM locked to a new Cellular MVNO run by Apple and if you wanted an iPhone you had to sign up for Apple Cellular? The iPhone 14 still used a Qualcomm baseband that supported LTE/5G but Apple locked it down to only their MVNO. An MVNO is a virtual network run on top of an existing network (e.g. AT&T, T-Mobile). How would you feel about that?
Apple NFC uses the same ISO 14443 protocol to talk to Payment Terminals that everyone else uses. Their payments run through the same card processor and merchant account networks as everyone else. There's no reason they couldn't expose the API to allow others to use the NFC capabilities of the iPhone to transact. They just choose not to because it allows them a monopoly.
you can use “what if” to create literally any scenario you want, and this is the best you could come up with? cmon, how am i supposed to be entertained by HN comments that don’t push the boundaries of creative writing :(
My intent with the analogy wasn't to suggest something Apple would do but rather to put forth a scenario with similar boundaries and that is easily relatable.
Apple doesn't currently control their cellular baseband or NFC chips. Both chips interface to external systems running standardized protocols on infrastructure outside of Apple's control. Both can be used to access any compatible network.
With Apple restricting NFC to Apple Pay, they're basically slapping a surcharge on any competitor's banking product regardless of who it is.
You can spin this as Apple fighting back against Big Banks, but you're the one paying the Apple tax not the banks. It also pushes out small credit unions who can't or won't pay the Apple tax.
That's some good news, hopefully a change will follow.
Note that Apple Pay also has a very low limit on the number of cards that you can add, presumably because each card occupies an actual hardware slot. In the original iPhone SE, that's only 8 cards, and Apple Cash (the debit card) gets counted as one of those (unless you're remove it manually), then if you have Apple Card (the credit card), presumably it takes another slot, so you're only left with just 6 slots for any other contactless credit or debit card.
How's such a low limit good for the consumer? If you only have 6 cards in total, might as well simply carry all of them in your wallet anyways; I do that already.
Android Pay and Google Pay don't have such tiny, restrictive and anticompetitive limits. I have like 20 different credit cards as contactless in Google Pay without any issues, which is very convenient if you care about bonus categories; same was for Android Pay before it got rebranded as Google Pay.
Plus, in Android, you can even select a third party app to be used for contactless in the "Default apps" — "Tap & pay" settings instead of Google Pay; I know Wells Fargo used to have contactless support in their own app at one point, for example, and was selectable there.
No, but some avid Apple fans will do some epic technical mental gymnastics to try to make the point that iPhones must always be better and faster at every operation.
I find this pretty funny - I can't imagine carrying more than two cards around with me on a daily basis. In fact one is just a backup.
I do of course have many more cards; one of the downsides of the credit system in the US is how you have to game it to improve your credit. But for the most part those stay in the drawer.
Exactly, I carry and regularly use only 3 physical cards. The rest of the 20 or so cards I only carry in Google Pay, with the physical cards staying in the drawer and which I only ever use for the 3-digit number when I verify Google Pay on a new phone.
You have "like 20 different credit cards"? I live in Europe and I don't know anybody who would have more than 4-6 cards total. Granted, it's an anecdotal proof, but I really have hard time imagining any of my friends having more than 8 cards in their wallets. Is it somehow a US thing?
I am in EU and have debit and credit cards in UK and EU and business account in EU. Also because in some places only Maestro is accepted I have maestro and MasterCard debit separately…
Because of travel I also have transferwise money anywhere card.
Maybe? Getting a bunch of cards works out in your favor. Costco card nets me 4% back on gas everywhere and 2% in store and extends the warranty on things. Southwest card nets me miles for flying, Chase cards get me points on certain things, etc. Suddenly you have tons of cards you cycle through to max out rewards to play the game. Also spread out your credit so you don't load up a single card with a heavy purchase.
If you're maximizing like this, though, you're likely to still have a small handful of daily drivers - a 2% general purpose card, a dining/grocery card, maybe a gas card.
My airline and hotel cards aren't in Apple Pay because they're largely worthless in-person. Same for my Amazon credit card; 5% back on everything Amazon, but I don't need it physically with me ever.
Sure, but the point is, do I want to carry 20 cards with me, when I can carry one phone? Similar to the Coin card RIP. I need my southwest card, costco, chase, chase debit, apple card, amex, etc on my person, just to name a few.
That's six, and you probably need the physical card for the debit for ATM access anyways. If you're in the Chase ecosystem, you're probably better off using the Chase cards and transferring to Southwest as a transfer partner, too, as you'll get better earn rates on every category than using the airline card itself.
Quite a few cards are worth having, but only in the sock drawer most of the time.
Don't all ATMs support contactless these days? I used ATM with contactless. So, no, you don't. You just need a good phone that doesn't have arbitrary restrictions.
Yes. Many/most Wells Fargo ATMs have had contactless for several years now. Their Android app used to offer NFC contactless support so that you never had to even use Google's Android Pay to use contactless.
I think they originally didn't work with contactless Android Pay, maybe because the card number is different, but it's been fixed a few years ago. They also have the app-based ATM login, so I don't recall ever using the physical WF debit card in the last X years.
Every Chase ATM I've used recently in California, Nevada, Colorado and Florida had contactless support on the ATM. I even pulled out large amounts of money via contactless without issue.
>Maybe? Getting a bunch of cards works out in your favor. Costco card nets me 4% back on gas everywhere and 2% in store and extends the warranty on things.
That's one way of looking at it. The other is that debt is priced in everything and you're just recouping part of it.
Am I supposed to just stop eating food and buying gas? I don't understand what you're trying to say. If the alternative is pay cash and not get these benefits the only other logical reason for your statement is that I have a choice in the matter to not do these things.
No, what I'm trying to say isn't that your decision-making is flawed, but that there's little decision-making involved and that you're driven into that path by the way the system is structured in the US. You guys are being forced into a situation where the most rational decision is to have a dozen credit cards to optimize for an arcane rule-set.
It's not uncommon to be able to collect more value from the rewards than what it costs for the merchant to accept the credit card.
For example, it often costs 3% or less to accept payment for a merchant, but there are many cards which offer rewards that can be valued at 7.5% cashback, or even higher values if you're into chic travel.
For example, many people have more than one of the same card, e.g., Chase Freedom is a popular example. By having 3 cards, you can increase the quarterly limit on the product by 3x — similar to using extra threads on a multicore CPU — it's still the same system, so there's no extra inconvenience. Since they're all from the same issuer, having any number of Chase cards is a fixed cost for the user, because all of them appear in a single account login, and can also be set to have identical due dates, too. Likewise, Google Pay and Chase have no limits to the number of cards you can add to a digital wallet, so, it works out there, too.
It's amazing how so many iPhone users project the perceived inconvenience of this approach, but there's actually no inconvenience for Android users, since Android's NFC is open and doesn't have any limits.
A lot of people chase sign up bonuses. Some credit cards have sign up bonuses equivalent to $1000+. So sign up for a year, and then cancel. Also our credit score systems consider number of open accounts, and anything less than 10 is considered as having too few accounts.
There's diminishing returns (credit score wise) on open accounts once you're at three - ten is hardly necessary - and if you're churning, you don't need the churned card in Apple Pay long-term.
> anything less than 10 is considered as having too few accounts.
Source? I do not think any person reviewing people’s credit history would rate people higher for having 10 low barrier to entry revolving credit accounts rather than say 5 or even 3.
Different types of credit are weighted differently, so mortgage and auto and student and revolving credit card are not all seen the same, and I would not believe “more is better”, especially just for revolving credit lines for credit cards.
It's proprietary info, part of the scoring models. I think the magic number for best score is actually 20+, but it also counts the closed accounts over the last 7 to 10 years, too.
I recall seeing this in Credit Karma or maybe Experian's FreeCreditScore at one point (that you have to have 20 or 21 accounts for the best score), but cannot find it right now. I think it's a relatively well known number.
Yep. That makes more sense. But here, they are basically looking at your ability to manage credit "responsibly" by looking at your payment history, and utilization, among other things.
So say if I spend $3000 a month, and pay it off every month in full, and my total credit limit is $10,000, they will ding me regardless of my payment history, because my utilization (30%+) is considered high. So if I want to maximize my credit score, it behooves me to get more cards (easiest way to increase total credit), and spread out the payments among them.
But if you are chasing sign up bonuses, that typically doesn’t happen all at once.
Assume you have a card for restaurants, one of travel, one for grocery’s, one for gas, one for entertainment and one catch all.
That’s 6. What else do you have a dedicated card for? 14 cards with sign up bonuses? All at the same time, each with minimum spending requirements to earn that bonus?
Let’s add some more. I have one card that pays $25 every quarter that I pay off in full every month so I use it once every month. I have a card with rotating categories. Even with multiple rotating categories I don’t see this going up past 12 cards.
Checking and savings debit cards, plus an HSA card add 3 more.
Sure, why do I need my savings account in my apple pay? Why did I put the plastic savings card into my physical wallet? Because that's where all of my other plastic cards are.
"The digital wallet should be able to hold all of my cards, even the ones I use infrequently" would certainly be my expectation.
So, basically, you're telling me I'm better off NOT storing my Hyatt, Marriott and IHG cards in my digital wallet only because I use them once every few years? Why exactly is that? Why not store all the cards in the digital wallet?
It's actually a really good idea, because it's a different account number they gets stored on the device, so, even if your hotel card is compromised because of the hotel leak, the copy in Google Pay will remain active and available. So, I could use it right away on the once-every-two-years bonus category without any extra hassle.
My Danish bank has to tell customers that "it is a good idea to have at least 2 cards, as you will otherwise have a hard time if your only card gets blocked for some reason".
So in Denmark many see no reason to more than a single card.
BTW. We don't have a concept like "credit score" at all.
I'm not in the US (HK) but me and a quite a few people I know have a dozen cards or more. I only regularly use 2-3 of them but the rest are useful for various occasions.
eg, Card A has no overseas transaction fees and has good exchange rate so I use it when travelling. Card B is same but I set a ridiculously low credit limit so I can use it in dodgy souvenir shops without worry. Card C gives airport lounge access. Card D gives free magazine and bottled water in the airport post-security areas. Card E grants access to clubhouses that are normally members-only, which I use for business meetings. Card F gets discounts for movie tickets, Card G to H gives free coffee upgrade from different chains, etc. And then there are a bunch that was pushed onto me when I got mortgage or a investment funds, that I never bothered to cancel since there's no annual fees and occasionally they'd have a promotion where it's actually useful.
I wouldn't want to carry all these physical cards, so I don't have them "in my wallet" per se, which is why it's nice to be able to add them all to my phone.
Exactly! The Chase cards I've mentioned are actually different, too, and give different benefits. I don't even churn them per se — there's still a benefit to keep all of them open longer term, because either there's no annual fee, or the AF is worth the benefits. Plus you get extra credit score benefits for the age of accounts.
It sounds like you're big on churning/optimizing rewards but I believe that you represent a tiny proportion of the population. The average US consumer has 4 credit cards (I only have one), so 6-8 slots seems like plenty.
I'm gonna drop this HN comment into the bin of "I have an extremely unusual need, but am totally obvlious about it, so this product is objectively bad for not catering to it"
Normal people do not have 20 credit cards. Even people I know who have several cards, often only have a couple they actually use on a daily basis. This is not a real problem.
You are aware that 20+ is actually the magical number of accounts that you're supposed to have in your credit file to have the best credit score?
This is not even about credit cards. Debit counts, too. Say you have two bank accounts, an HSA account, one premium card, one business credit card, one everyday card, one… Oops, out of slots already!
It sounds like you're really happy with Apple products, and will simply change your life around them, instead of demanding something better. 6+ cards is probably already the average for many people.
That's the whole point — I can add the ones I rarely use to Android Pay still.
For example, I have 11 Chase credit cards, and all of them are in Google Pay on Android. I almost never use the hotel ones; they simply provide other benefits for the annual fee, like the free hotel night for each annual fee renewal. But sometimes they do run bonus spend promotions, that's where once every year I can simply use those cards through Android/Google Pay on Android without having to worry about finding the physical card that I only use once a year.
But do you really need to add all of those 20 cards to your digital wallet? Just carry the cards with you if you care so much about min-maxing the credit score game.
If you're actively using you cards (churning [0]) then yes. The point of tap to pay is to prevent carrying all the cards, thus lightening your daily carry.
All the Chase credits cards show up under a single login; you can pretty much simply login once a month a pay all 9 or 11 of them at once. Or setup auto-pay. Or change the due-date to be the exact same date for all of them, so you only have to login and pay exactly once a month.
I have all 11 of Chase credit cards in Google Pay. If I switch phones, they're already available for verification on the new phone, you don't have to type the whole number anymore. I keep all but 3 to 5 credit cards in a sock drawer; but I can still use any one of them 20 at any time thanks to Google Pay.
When I need to use any one of my 20 cards to make a purchase, simply scroll through and select, based on picture and/or description. If vendor doesn't accept contactless, simply use one of the 5 physical cards I do carry.
The only inconvenience is that it doesn't work on iPhone, and that's one of the reasons I don't use iPhone as a primary phone, because so many things don't work there.
Says who? I have great with only one credit card. The key to good credit isn't some esoteric process to game the system. Its having a good and long credit history.
I have the best credit score possible and only 2 credit card accounts. Empirically, there is no relationship between having large numbers of credit cards and having the best credit score.
You do realise that the common understanding of a “credit score” is complete bollocks right?
There's no single magic number thats your credit score, other than the one credit reference agencies provide, which no bank worth their salt uses, making that number meaningless.
Banks buy credit files from reference agencies, which contain hundreds of different data points for each individual. Then the bank use their own internal models to calculate credit risk, or identify customers they like. That model will be different at every bank, and for every class of product they sell.
If this wasn’t true, then there would be no differentiation between lenders, other than interest rate. Leaders use their own secret sauce models to help them identify and classify specific groups of individuals that meet their risk appetite. And they won’t just be optimising for repayment or profit, they’ll also be looking to ensure their loan book is highly diverse. Ensuring they’re not overexposed to big events (like, say, a global pandemic), which might disproportionately impact a subset of customers (such as people working in hospitality).
So the idea that 20 cards is some magic number for a good “credit score” is just crap. And grossly underestimates both the diversity and complexity of credit decisioning.
Why not? When you physically had to carry all of them around, it was simply impractical to have 20 different cards.
If you can add all of them to a tiny device, and they all come from just a few banks that provide a unified interface to manage 10 cards at a time, and/or set them all up for auto-pay, then why wouldn't you want to make the most out of all the offers and bonuses?
The entire system of credit card tie-ins is based on predatory debt practices. It's ingrained in US culture, but a lot of people on HN probably see it as a problem that shouldn't even have to be addressed in the first place. Facilitating the growth of the credit card ecosystem sounds like asking for trouble.
There are hardware limits on how many you can put in an iPhone, just like there are limits to how many you can stuff into a wallet. Most wallets won't fit 20 cards, either.
I fail to understand how can anyone claim that an 8-card limit in a digital wallet on a 32GB+ device is reasonable, when you can literally store more cards than that even in an average physical wallet.
And, again, Android's NFC and Google Pay have no such limits.
Apple Pay cards are stored in a special piece of hardware. That the limit went from 8 to 12 in later devices implies it has fairly limited storage space.
Loyalty cards are unlimited. I have dozens of those.
It's just another over-engineered gimmick from Apple. 12 (10 to third-party at intro?) may be slightly better for an average user than 8 (7 to third-party at intro?), but it still means that you have to delete and re-verify cards all the time, which defeats the whole purpose of the extra security for the data.
In Android Pay and now rebranded as Google Pay all contactless was and is unlimited. You never have to delete any card. You only have to re-verify the cards if you switch devices. That's literally how a digital wallet is meant to be, if you ask me.
> but it still means that you have to delete and re-verify cards all the time
None of your comments seem to show any realization that this is not a problem almost anyone faces. I do not have to delete and re-verify cards all the time — you do.
It's only not a problem for Apple fans because they've learned to accept subpar products with gimmick features and misleading marketing. Plus, the anticonsumer features being sold by Apple as security requirements.
And I don't have to delete any cards either, because for my daily driver I use actual professional devices that run Android instead of the "Pro" gimmicks without Pro features that Apple makes. Apple Pay is useless, so they get what they deserve: $0.00 spend from me because I'm not using it just for one card when I can use all of my cards in Android.
It's mind boggling how people will go to such great lengths to defend such a silly 7-card limit. Or all these suggestions that imply that carrying 20 cards is impractical, when they literally all fit into any Google device of same size as an iPhone. This whole thread and the downvotes are really a travesty. You'd think people on HN would know better than ignore the obvious. But I guess Apple fans are toxic and stubborn regardless of the forum.
Casual reminder that you're not supposed to downvote comments you simply disagree with, but only comments that are incorrect or don't contribute to a healthy discussion. But the Apple fans don't seen to care about such etiquette, and the net score of anyone saying anything that's not positive of Apple appears to be in the negative even here on HN that's supposed to be free of such obvious bias and fanatism.
"Not catering to it" and "refusing to allow anyone to build a solution, even if they're willing to put in the resources" are very different. On Android, if Google's wallet thing has a limitation I don't like, I can easily use another NFC payment app.
Also, this isn't a missing feature but an arbitrary limitation, so again, Apple doesn't need to "cater to it", just raise an int in the source code from 6 to 20 or whatever.
> Also, this isn't a missing feature but an arbitrary limitation, so again, Apple doesn't need to "cater to it", just raise an int in the source code from 6 to 20 or whatever.
I imagine it might be a hardware limitation? I couldn't find any details about where it comes from. They might be storing private keys in physical hardware; but then why does each card has to have its own private key, why not share all of it together?
It's blatantly absurd to have that much extra security for something that's fundamentally insecure anyways.
I have more than 8 cards, but wasn’t aware this limit was even a thing because there’s no reason for some of them to be added to Apple Pay or carried around. Like the Amazon prime card, which exists only to be used on Amazon or various rotating category cards, of which typically only one or two of are useful at any given time and are used almost exclusively online.
Not to say there’s no legitimate use case for 8+ cards in Apple Pay, but I’m having a hard time envisioning it.
The ONLY card I have in Apple Pay is my Amazon Prime credit card. It’s the only credit card I have (other than my corp Amex, which is used once every few years for work). Every purchase gets you dollars on your Amazon account, so I actually use those rewards (versus the other “points” or “miles” I’ve had over the years and never used).
To the story itself: we’re at an interesting junction where your “phone” is absolutely a company’s product and they should be able to define the experience, but also becoming an essential utility in many societies where certain limitations are harmful. I’m still unsure where I land on some of these cases.
> Every purchase gets you dollars on your Amazon account, so I actually use those rewards (versus the other “points” or “miles” I’ve had over the years and never used).
Well good for you. But there are tons of cards that give $ directly in your bank account instead of Amazon account and at a better rate as well. e.g. Chase Freedom has 5% cashback categories every quarter that can be converted into real dollars at 1:1 rate. So...
I have also a credit card that is needed by car rentals. And use it only there.
And I don't carry around my card because it is something I can forget. And I always carry a phone, so why have two if I need only one. Not to mention limits on pinless payments are higher in Google/Apple pay.
In the US, I've even had bank representatives during a fraud alert call tell me I always need more than one card in case one is restricted in any way. (Presumably from different banks/issuers, too, but even a single issuer is also better than nothing.)
What would you do if you need to rent a car, but your bank is down, and cannot authorise the payment?
The cards I have actually pay me back in rewards for having them. Why would I NOT have as many as they'll give me?
Most of my 20 cards come from just 3 issuers (Chase being the one who gave me the most cards), so, it's not even like it's even an issue from the management perspective, because each card is free (or even net negative cost) to own and operate, and it costs about the same amount of time to service them by the dozen as it would take to service just one of them.
> What would you do if you need to rent a car, but your bank is down, and cannot authorise the payment?
This is end-of-the-world type scenario, you can prepare but should you go always prepared for it?
> The cards I have actually pay me back in rewards for having them. Why would I NOT have as many as they'll give me?
OK, that might be some countries specific, but in my country debit/credit (debits are way way more popular here) there are usually no rewards for paying and juggling cards to save 1-2% is not worth it - had once such card, after 6 months they resigned from such rewards and choosing card to use even on phone is a PITA instead of using the default one.
And this was just an exception, usually you don't get rewards unless you have an expensive credit card that gives you mile rewards, but for that you really need to use that card everywhere to make it worth it - so again no need for other cards.
A single bank being down is definitely NOT the end of the world, provided you personally do have alternative accounts.
I think a few years ago one UK bank had a downtime of a few days on their payment network. Wasn't that limited to a single bank? If you don't have to pay an annual fee for a credit card, why would you not at least have a few, to avoid such a scenario?
Plus, bank-specific individual account lockouts are far more common worldwide, or customer service and unlock department might be having technical issues. None of this is the end of the world for anyone who has several credit cards.
By writing "end of the world scenario" I mean that it happens so rarely that there is no need to prepare for that unless you are a prepper.
I use a single bank for the last 15 years, there was no issue with it that would cause me to not be able to use my money.
They usually have scheduler work during some weekend nights, and I don't remember any large scale issue besides that - for sure I didn't have a scenario where I was without money.
For such scenario it is better to have some cash (which I do, but for other reasons - e.g. paying nanny or some workers that don't accept card payments).
What would you do if it's declined or the number is compromised?
I stopped carrying cash like 10 years ago. Even banks themselves recommend having more than one card just in case an issue occurs, to ensure you're not left stranded.
Seriously more than 6 cards? More than 8 if that includes apple? Either some flyertalk point collector or someone heading for troubling times when the credit runs dry
If you build it, they will take it away from you. That's the European market for you and compounding legal issues like this make it a difficult one to foster innovation in.
This strikes me differently from the App Store issues. There Apple is dealing with 3rd parties and trying to create a playing field where they allow competitors on their platform, i.e. Apple Music and Spotify. Here Apple built their NFC chip for their own use and for their own product. If another company wants to provide NFC capability for credit cards, they can and the actual credit cards already do.
> If another company wants to provide NFC capability for credit cards, they can and the actual credit cards already do.
The other companies wants to provide NFC capabilities for their mobile bank/direct payment app. Like Norwegian “Vipps”, direct instant payments between any Norwegian bank.
And within the EU (EEA incl) these systems are interoperable, I can use my German bank's debit card in France, Italy, and ironically also in Switzerland. Even via NFC...
I think the issue is not with supply of the chip, but Apple restricting API access to the chip on IOS devices. They're basically gatekeeping hw features, and preventing anyone else from providing the same level of features on IOS by software restriction.
Could be wrong though, as I haven't followed it closely, being an Android user.
You got this wrong, the title is a bit confusing though.
It's about Apple not allowing other software to use the NFC and using it to force apple pay.
> If you build it, they will take it away from you. That's the European market for you and compounding legal issues like this make it a difficult one to foster innovation in.
Now that a really stupid statement, what does it even mean?
Europe is a bad guy that goes from house to house to steal kids drawing?
Europe bashing every time there's a form of regulation is really exhausting. So Europe should be a lawless place?
I didn't quite understand the initial complaint. Access to the NFC capability maybe; though apps can already use the NFC reader and writer -- I use it with my glucose monitor -- so I'm not sure what is being mistranslated by Reuters.
As far as access to the payment system itself, I also don't quite understand: if you have access to the NFC interface you can can presumably build your own payment system (e.g. google pay could in theory run on the iPhone -- is that what they mean?
From 2014 (when NFC support was introduced) until 2017 (when iOS 11 was released) there was no way for 3rd party apps to use NFC on iOS at all; only apps by Apple could use NFC.
There is still no technical ability for 3rd party payment apps to be able to be used from the lock screen like Apple Pay, and according to other comments Apple Pay has some special hardware access (to be able to work faster?).
> and according to other comments Apple Pay has some special hardware access (to be able to work faster?).
Actually it's to store the payment credentials. Basically, you need a SE (secure element) that's physically tied to the NFC chip to handle payments if you want to be able to get banks to issue permanent keys you can use to sign. Some Android phones may support this (not sure), but Android Pay works a bit differently in that they're issued some small fixed number of single use tokens for payments that expire every 30 days and have to do a network attestation that they've kept the tokens secure to refresh them. Part of the attestation is a confirmation that the device isn't root kitted (this is done via complex fingerprinting that Google Play Services performs to try to detect running on a root kitted phone).
It wouldn't surprise me in this case that bank requirements aren't a part of how Apple structured this system as a lot of this was developed before the banks had their shit together (Apple had to use a third party to manage some crypto keys whereas newer iterations of the standard remove the trusted partner). That being said, it also wouldn't surprise me if Apple did this to retain a monopoly over the payment infrastructure in their ecosystem as that's extremely strategic for them in the long term (e.g. Apple Card). There are also UX reasons why it makes sense to do the way they did (at least initially) but maybe there are ways to design out of it to allow for 3p partners.
The only reason the popular payment system in Switzerland (Twint) uses garbage bluetooth at some cash registers or qr codes (at RF terminals) is because Apple not allowing the use of their NFC (at least they did not back a few years ago). Until recently, Apple was very dominant in Switzerland and any payment solution that didn't work with Apple would be dead on arrival.
Every 3rd question on the Twint forums is a request to implement payment via watch but that ain't happening as long as Apple block this and they will not enable a feature only for Android users.
There aren't any good Android watches really. Perhaps this will change with Google and Samsung pairing up but right now as Android user you're pretty much out of luck
I thought parent meant payment via android phones. Is there a difference between that and watches? NFC (Google pay) should work the same across the Android ecosystem, no?
I dunno, I bought a cheap-o Fossil watch a couple years ago on a whim, and I actually ended up using the Google Pay feature most of all. Being able to leave my phone and wallet in my backpack while I pay for coffee felt like a whole new level of real-life Disneyland.
I had a Galaxy Watch Active with Samsung Pay for a while and I have to agree. That is a great feature if it works.
However, it didn't actually work very well. You have to do several button presses and taps on the phone, during which it launches very slowly, and once you get to the payment part it often failed for whatever reason. "Multiple cards detected", "payment denied", whatever. It was quicker to fish the card out of my wallet and much less stressful.
PS: The card I paid with when it failed was the exact same card that I had linked to Samsung Pay, there were no balance issues :)
Android Pay (when I used it) was distinctly different. As long as it was unlocked (eg. hadn't been taken off your wrist) you could press a button to quick-launch the NFC payment app. Since I wasn't using the shortcuts for anything else, it worked quite well for me.
There aren't any good Smart Watches, really. Apple aren't good smartwatch manufacturers when their smartwatches only know how to talk to other Apple devices and services (like HealthKit or whatever it's called) and actively prevent compatibility with other systems. I mean, that's just buying into Apple's hype. If their watch was so good, they'd make it talk through open standards and they wouldn't go for ecosystem lock-in: it would be good on its own merit.
My Samsung Galaxy watch has had an EKG sensor for longer than it has taken for Apple to add their own. It's technologically superior, and also has a circular face instead of being a big square block, and has better battery life since I can get a good 2 days or more out of it. But ultimately it is also as bad as Apple because it only works well with Samsung's ecosystem.
The whole point about Apple (for decades) is vertical integration, building hardware and software specifically optimized for the said hardware. That’s what Apple is in it’s core, that’s why they’ve been revolutionizing industries and that’s why iPhones, iPads and MacBooks are most performant and battery efficient consumer devices for years.
It’s like saying - “There aren’t any good consoles really. Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo aren’t good console manufacturers when their consoles only know how to talk to other PlayStation/Xbox/Nintendo services and actively prevent compatibility with other systems.”
“There aren’t any good consoles really. Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo aren’t good console manufacturers when their consoles only know how to talk to other PlayStation/Xbox/Nintendo services and actively prevent compatibility with other systems.”
To be fair that point did improve in the last few years. In the past, cross-platform online play wasn't even a thing.
They're opening up because they're competing against eachothers, while Apple is doing whatever it can to avoid open standards with their devices. Unless the standard itself is too big to avoid and not adopting it would put them at a disadvantage.
Huh? MacBooks have the same performance as corresponding Windows laptops. That only slightly changed with M1, but it doesn't seem anything to do with vertical integration, and rather just the result of buying out 5nm production.
Also there is complete lack of models with Nvidia GPUs, so they are a lackluster in graphics.
At the cost of reducing the opinion of your company for anyone who has problems.
Whether or not that's a worthwhile tradeoff: I dunno! No doubt it depends on exact numbers, lifetime expected value, potential word-of-mouth damage, etc.
Its a bank. People will pay and use money either way. Its a feature improvement, not an original feature. If they just avoid the headaches, they don't lose anything really.
I assume it is because at the moment the usability is identical across all devices and bank versions. Enabling a feature on a device and not on the other which has more users will cause support headaches.
That doesn't work with Apple fans. They will blame you, never Apple. It has gotten better now but back then it was always your fault because Apple was the most innovative etc. etc. etc.
And Android copied windows phone. ;) Windows phone had some of the best power settings for a long time, turning into a dumb phone when the battery got low.
Why stop implementing a feature because one of the vendor is arbitrarily limiting the hardware? Targetting the lowest common denominator isn't always the right move, especially if one platform is stagnating for their own benefit.
Light up a fire under their feet, have the userbase put some pressure on Apple if they're unhappy about the situation.
And the only reason why a national, NIH payment system like Twint became "popular" was that all bigger Swiss banks for several years refused to allow regular mobile payments (i.e. Apple Pay, Google Pay, Samsung Pay) for their credit cards.
Since 2019, more and more banks have started enabling regular mobile payments, so it's going to be interesting to see where that leaves Twint (I've never used it, so I have no idea what reasons one would have to use it over NFC payments, other than lack of support by one's card provider).
Twint has one advantage over cards and that is online payments. It is so quick and easy to scan a code and pay than entering credit card details. Yes, I know apple pay can do things like that but I still need a credit card in that case. Twint lets me pay directly out of my bank account or even via prepaid Twint.
The biggest "scam" going on now is the banks specifically Visa pushing their garbage Debit card. For users it seems great as it's cheaper no fee thing, however for vendors it is a nightmare. The fees are astronomical over regular credit cards yet they have to accept them if they want to accept Visa's credit card. Visa found another legal loop hole they can milk and they are going all the way.
I'd argue that for the customer, Apple Pay is about as quick and easy as it gets. Obtaining a credit card is a one time inconvenience.
The potential fees involved would be more of a concern for the vendors, it seems to me. Are you saying that Visa debit cards have higher fees than their credit cards? My understanding was that usually it's the other way around.
Twint has no fees for the customer and you can send each other money as well. The Vendor pays around 2%
Visa has higher fees not for the customer but for the vendors. It's specifically a problem in Switzerland where the "Maestro" bank cards are being replaced with Visa Debit which is being pushed by the banks. The benefit for the custom is they can use those visa cards online but the fees at the store for the vendor are up to 260 times higher. [1]
From the article, it appears like Maestro had a fixed fee, while Visa has a percentage of the transaction amount. Visa claims that small transactions might be getting a bit cheaper, but for big ticket items, the transaction obviously is considerably more expensive.
This is a pretty clear case though, it's the same situtation in Norway.
The country wide standard BankAxept, that has low fees (0.024USD per transaction), is used for almost all other card transactions, but Apple use their NFC monopoly to charge stores exorbiant VISA network fees when people use their Apple devices to pay. If the blockage of BankAxept on Apple Pay is allowed to continue it could cost the Norwegian economy hundreds of millions of dollars in just monopoly fees.
In France, you can't store a metro card on your iPhone, because Apple won't open up NFC. You can do it on Android.
Yet, I don't want banks to drop Apple Pay support, and force you to use their poorly coded app for payments. Imagine having many cards, for personal and business, joint cards and foreign cards, thankfully many banks on Android end up supporting GPay, but many still force you to use their custom app and don't give you a choice. How many years did your bank take before adopting Touch ID? For me and some of you, it's measured in years.
Apple shouldn't be able to block third-party NFC use, but should be entitled to force banks to make Apple Pay-compatible equivalents (when applicable) in addition to whatever custom stuff they decide to roll out.
Not sure what it's like in the US (or the EU), but in Canada, all banks effectively offer the same level of customer-hostile service.
Without a doubt, they'd roll their own fragmented/compromised implementation of contactless payments on iOS, if they had the choice.
Not quite the same, but so many large corps in Canada don't offer Wallet integration for their relevant products (loyalty cards, points balances, etc.) They instead have their own app for these, and let me tell you: they are all garbage.
Apple doesn't block third-party NFC / Apple Wallet use. They have opened it for certain use cases, including transit passes in many cities: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT207958
> In France, you can't store a metro card on your iPhone, because Apple won't open up NFC. You can do it on Android.
Which metro cards? Navigo have been supported all year.
Apple's hardware doesn't allow for arbitrary card emulation - the logic has to run inside the Secure Enclave, and AFAIK that is an atomic block of firmware shipped along with the OS. No third party code allowed.
But they have added that secure enclave support for the various metro card networks, including "express pay" where NFC functions like metro cards will work even with the phone powered down due to low battery.
You can recharge Navigo but not load it onto your phone like with Apple Pay cards. That's only possible on Samsungs, not other Androids or iPhones, and even though according to one commenter this may not be the case much longer, I hate to see things that slow technical progress and QoL improvements down.
I looked more into it - you are correct, Navigo sounds like it still won't replace a physical card.
My understanding is that do to patent royalties wanted by the underlying Calypso system, it was not merged into ISO 14443 and deviates in a few ways.
Apple has historically implemented more of their NFC stack in hardware than other implementations, so there may be limitations as a result of the with communication with a card reader.
Can we get some more general laws to open up technologies that are used for the interchange of data? E.g. filesystems (FAT etc.), codecs (JPEG, MPEG), documents (DOC), fonts, ...
Good! Apple has had a very weird agreement with the issuer banks and payment networks covered here by the WSJ https://archive.is/H37WU (Please, support them if you can afford it, they produce wonderful journalism)
Tl;dr:
- Banks agreed to pay Apple 0.15% of transactions
- Payment networks allowed them to select which banks and which cards would be supported. The industry standard is, if you support one card you have to support all
- Somehow, the payment networks convinced Apple to agree not to compete with them by creating their own payment network in exchange for favorable terms
What are the privacy risks of Apple Pay over a contactless card? My understanding is the applet in the Secure Element operates independently of the system, and Apple does not collect data about where I transact.
Yea I guess Apple Pay is decently private. I would assume anything available on Android is providing Google, Samsung, etc. with a lot of transaction data.
I have both an iPhone with Apple Pay and an Android with NFC and Google Pay (previously known as Android Pay before the rebranding).
Did you know that you can use Android NFC to read the full 16-digit card number of any contactless card, including the Apple Pay cards from an iOS device? The ones that are so secure you can't even see them within the interface of Apple Pay itself? And which have to be stored in a special storage on the device such that you're limited to only 8 or 12 cards, depending on the generation of the Apple Pay device?
I don't think you can even do that on an iPhone, since Apple Pay is apparently the only app that's allowed to use the NFC chip.
Yeah, although that number isn't the original card number, it's a "Device Account Number" which is unique to a specific device. I believe it's a pretty useless number to know. It can only be used in combination with a cryptographic challenge-response which verifies the particular device and matches the "Device Account Number".
Great article! I contact the creditor who performed the inquiry and ask for their proof of authorization but got no useful response from them, they kept coming up with excuses and delay tactics, I was so frustrated and annoyed as I needed to get a home but I was always been denied due to inquiries on my report. I had to make research on my own and I came across this credit repair with decades of experience whom I got in touch with (cybspace279 at g mail com) he promised he would helped me get my credit fixed asked me for a tips and necessary info. Long story short, all inquiries were removed, late payment was marked on time payment, all debt were been paid off and finally my score increased to 800s(I wish I could show you my New report here but I can’t due to identity theft). I never doubted this great man cus I already read a lot of review and praises, thou I’m not asked to share this but I feel it’s high time we Know that Creditor or credit bureaus won’t get your credit fixed, you have to make a smart move to save yourself in time
I was tring to get a FHO Loan and was thinking my credit was good enough for that not untill i made a research and learnt that my score should be at a minimum range of 520 and at that point i had a poor credit of 485 and needed to get the negatives i have on there erased as well but I couln't do that by myself so i had to make contact with a credit specialist to seek advice on how to go about that and she advised i should use a credit hack specialist and she gave me a the specialist contact which really went a long way for me , the credit hack specialist got my credit back up at 810 and all negatives taken down .. I was really pleased with his work and would highly recommend him for anyone who is in the same situation that i was in .( DOOMHACKS AT BK DOT RU ).that's his email right there .
223 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 238 ms ] threadApple is blurring all the lines and attempting to put everything under the Apple umbrella of products. If 50% of people use an iPhone, then by Apple's logic, 50% of all commerce and transactions can be taxed by Apple at every ingress and egress.
This isn't fair and Apple needs to be shut down in this effort.
Apple should have nothing to do with payments, and I hope the EU rips them a new one. We need to do the same back at home.
If an Apple application can access an API then this API should be accessible to competitors.
I am expecting some comment asking about security, the answer is Apple should have the money and talent to handle this(though with latest reveals security needs more attention). Applications can access your clipboard, your files, your photos , you tell the user that say "This Sudoku game wants access to your photos" and the user should answer but it would be even a better experience if the review process would actually work on those dudes won't just complain about links colors and other superficial shit.
Imagine your reaction if "Only Microsoft can create antivirus,firewall, browser,VM software for Windows because security and think about my mom)
But they started off with one option and that was it.
None of this is as simple as "everyone gets everything no matter the context or cost".
In my mind the fact that support for opening up iPhones and the like isn’t unilateral is something of an indictment of the larger state of the software world. When users are actively seeking a walled garden as a form of shelter, you know something with the surrounding world is messed up pretty badly. Yes Apple needs to do better, but so do the overwhelming majority of companies putting out any kind of software.
If every iPhone is going to be a gateway for terrible payment solutions we’re in it for a world of hurt (forget wallets, one app and one custom solution per store, or more, will be the norm).
I don't want a wallet. I just want to send money from my bank account, and this is already a solved problem which apple has no business getting their nose in.
ApplePay is opt-in btw, so it’s not like you’re forced to use it. It’s an extremely good user product, far exceeding anything else we’ve had available in my country.
Unfortunately for Apple that is not the case. With ideal, which again has been around for more than a decade, payments are instant and secure. Everyone has been using it for a decade. Works great! No need to pay apple 30%, and yet they demand it.
https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/connectivity/nfc/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO/IEC_14443
I think Wells Fargo actually did used to have their own Android Pay alternative within their own app, but they've discontinued it, and now you have to add their cards directly into Google Pay.
If you go into "Settings", "Apps & notifications", "Advanced": "Default apps", "Tap & pay", then you can select either "Google Pay" or another app that you may have. I think "Wells Fargo" app used to show up there back when they supported contactless within their app.
That said, I've seen exactly once someone using and Android phone to pay contactless. It was a huge pain, they tried multiple times.
Samsung Pay's Magnetic Stripe Emulation is much cooler, it's like magic. Unfortunately, magnetic stripes are a legacy tech.
That's bit harsh don't you think?
It's a bit like Ford selling a v6 Mustang with 4 functional cylinders and a switch on the dashboard that enables the other two but you're not allowed to flip the switch unless you send Ford $$$.
Nintendo could have easily prevented copying tags by writing a signature based on the tag's MAC to the data on the tag itself. The Switch would just read the tag, generate a signature and compare it to the data read.
An NFC code isn't a creative work that can be copyrighted, and it's a stretch to call an NFC tag a DRM system. IANAL, but I suspect that Nintendo would have a hard time arguing in a court that aftermarket Amiibo cards are doing anything illegal at all (of course, provided those cards don't violate trademark or have copyrighted graphics/characters printed on them).
That's a dangerous game around these parts.
> I have no problem with people downloading a few hundreds bytes of data to unlock parts of software they already paid for.
I agree, the locked content is taking up storage space on their device and for many it's permanently inaccessible due to the scarcity of the cards.
Subtlety is lost in text, and wasted on the technically-minded.
> the locked content is taking up storage space
Modders noticed unknown amiibo codes in the Wii U version of Breath of the Wild version and were able to create tags months before the amiibos were actually released. So in this case the locked content is released earlier than designed.
European Union antitrust enforcement has support of may civil liberty and privacy organizations and political parties. Their main complaint is that they are not doing enough.
Vestager fights a popular fight, but she fights it badly. Almost everything significant she has tried to do has been blocked by courts or settled away. She’s Europe’s Eliot Spitzer.
Eh, privacy. A bit. The reason banks want you to use their app is they can collect more data than Apple passes along. I also doubt contactless payment would have the adoption it has among iOS users without Apple’s branding and marketing push.
There’s incredibly strict laws around banking privacy in NL (and most of the EU). My banks can’t even mine my transactions for any inference, except fraud. They need my approval to even categorize or track spending.
Frankly, if Apple's the alternative, I'd rather roll my own security. I have no interest in wasting my time trying to pick the lock on my golden handcuffs just to use my computer without being watched.
"For Messages in iCloud, if you have iCloud Backup turned on, your backup includes a copy of the key protecting your messages. This ensures you can recover your messages if you lose access to your Keychain and your trusted devices. When you turn off iCloud Backup, a new key is generated on your device to protect future messages and isn't stored by Apple." https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202303
Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping of this nature, to the point of getting in a public fight with the FBI over it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_d...
The Snowden leaks indicate the two alternatives you suggest, Google and Microsoft, joined PRISM before Apple did, stating "98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
Eh, that was 2016.
Half a decade later and Apple has since kowtowed to the Chinese government to allow spying on iCloud user data. Despite their privacy-centric branding campaigns, Profits >> Privacy for Apple.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-ce...
If you're a Chinese citizen, you're surveilled by the Chinese government, regardless of which device you buy.
Google faced the same with project Dragonfly and employees chose to not kowtow to Chinese government spying.
Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software.
Unless I become a Chinese citizen/resident, Apple's dealings with China don't particularly concern me much.
Apple had a choice, and those chose to be able to operate in Chinese markets (including for manufacturing) over blatantly breaking Chinese law.
Apple's fight with the FBI over the San Bernardino shooter phone instance was made possible by them having legal recourse in the US to do so. Remember that Apple is only a corporation because the government allows them to be one.
Upset the CCP enough, you might not even get parts out of China to assemble elsewhere. Perhaps why Apple has invested in having multiple sources for all of their components, multiple manufacturing facilities in different countries, etc.
While also patting Apple on the back for privacy.
Maybe in the US. But hear in the EU contactless was a thing a decade before Apple Pay came along, and just about every merchant and bank card supported it for at least 5 years before Apple Pay.
Indeed I would say that Apple Pay wouldn’t have the adoption it does in the EU, if it wasn't for contactless providing all the infrastructure needed to power it. A point you can provide evidence for my comparing Apple Pay adoption in the US vs EU.
On your privacy point, you realise that banks get same amount of data about a transaction via the card networks, regardless of whether or not you use Apple Pay. The only party that looses any info is the merchant.
I don’t know the situation in the EU, given the privacy laws, but in the U.S., banks’ enhanced data from app-based contactless payments (on Android, obviously) sell at a premium to those through a scrubbed channel. The app picks up a lot more information, e.g. signals, location, device, clipboard, et cetera, than the payment transcript.
In the US theres a very clear financial incentive for banks to try and cut out card networks, and claim their portion of the fees. The hard part then is convincing merchants to invest the time and money needed to support these new payment systems. Hence the significant carrot of providing customer data to merchants.
In the EU, the banks wouldn’t make a significant saving by cutting out the card networks. So it not clear how they would fund the incentives needed to get merchants to support their new systems. All of those provides a barrier to bank payment apps (for C2B payments, C2C payments all happen through normal bank apps), before you even bring privacy into the equation, which just makes a bank payment system even less appealing to merchants.
Having said all of that, open banking in the EU is creating new opportunities for merchants and banks to skip card networks, especially for online payments. So it'll be interesting to see how that ecosystem evolves over time.
* People in Europe who use contactless all the time rarely have as many cards as some Americans.
* Americans who have that many cards rarely use contactless.
Perhaps I am an outlier for actually using all my cards contactless.
What if the iPhone 14 was SIM locked to a new Cellular MVNO run by Apple and if you wanted an iPhone you had to sign up for Apple Cellular? The iPhone 14 still used a Qualcomm baseband that supported LTE/5G but Apple locked it down to only their MVNO. An MVNO is a virtual network run on top of an existing network (e.g. AT&T, T-Mobile). How would you feel about that?
Apple NFC uses the same ISO 14443 protocol to talk to Payment Terminals that everyone else uses. Their payments run through the same card processor and merchant account networks as everyone else. There's no reason they couldn't expose the API to allow others to use the NFC capabilities of the iPhone to transact. They just choose not to because it allows them a monopoly.
Apple doesn't currently control their cellular baseband or NFC chips. Both chips interface to external systems running standardized protocols on infrastructure outside of Apple's control. Both can be used to access any compatible network.
With Apple restricting NFC to Apple Pay, they're basically slapping a surcharge on any competitor's banking product regardless of who it is.
You can spin this as Apple fighting back against Big Banks, but you're the one paying the Apple tax not the banks. It also pushes out small credit unions who can't or won't pay the Apple tax.
Note that Apple Pay also has a very low limit on the number of cards that you can add, presumably because each card occupies an actual hardware slot. In the original iPhone SE, that's only 8 cards, and Apple Cash (the debit card) gets counted as one of those (unless you're remove it manually), then if you have Apple Card (the credit card), presumably it takes another slot, so you're only left with just 6 slots for any other contactless credit or debit card.
How's such a low limit good for the consumer? If you only have 6 cards in total, might as well simply carry all of them in your wallet anyways; I do that already.
Android Pay and Google Pay don't have such tiny, restrictive and anticompetitive limits. I have like 20 different credit cards as contactless in Google Pay without any issues, which is very convenient if you care about bonus categories; same was for Android Pay before it got rebranded as Google Pay.
Plus, in Android, you can even select a third party app to be used for contactless in the "Default apps" — "Tap & pay" settings instead of Google Pay; I know Wells Fargo used to have contactless support in their own app at one point, for example, and was selectable there.
Because having it in hardware means it fetches faster. That’s why I use Apple Pay. The other apps are slower than swiping.
Android's contactless doesn't require network connectivity. You can switch and use any of the added cards without having any network connection.
I do of course have many more cards; one of the downsides of the credit system in the US is how you have to game it to improve your credit. But for the most part those stay in the drawer.
Because of travel I also have transferwise money anywhere card.
My airline and hotel cards aren't in Apple Pay because they're largely worthless in-person. Same for my Amazon credit card; 5% back on everything Amazon, but I don't need it physically with me ever.
Quite a few cards are worth having, but only in the sock drawer most of the time.
I think they originally didn't work with contactless Android Pay, maybe because the card number is different, but it's been fixed a few years ago. They also have the app-based ATM login, so I don't recall ever using the physical WF debit card in the last X years.
That's one way of looking at it. The other is that debt is priced in everything and you're just recouping part of it.
It's pretty f*cked.
For example, it often costs 3% or less to accept payment for a merchant, but there are many cards which offer rewards that can be valued at 7.5% cashback, or even higher values if you're into chic travel.
For example, many people have more than one of the same card, e.g., Chase Freedom is a popular example. By having 3 cards, you can increase the quarterly limit on the product by 3x — similar to using extra threads on a multicore CPU — it's still the same system, so there's no extra inconvenience. Since they're all from the same issuer, having any number of Chase cards is a fixed cost for the user, because all of them appear in a single account login, and can also be set to have identical due dates, too. Likewise, Google Pay and Chase have no limits to the number of cards you can add to a digital wallet, so, it works out there, too.
It's amazing how so many iPhone users project the perceived inconvenience of this approach, but there's actually no inconvenience for Android users, since Android's NFC is open and doesn't have any limits.
Source? I do not think any person reviewing people’s credit history would rate people higher for having 10 low barrier to entry revolving credit accounts rather than say 5 or even 3.
Different types of credit are weighted differently, so mortgage and auto and student and revolving credit card are not all seen the same, and I would not believe “more is better”, especially just for revolving credit lines for credit cards.
I recall seeing this in Credit Karma or maybe Experian's FreeCreditScore at one point (that you have to have 20 or 21 accounts for the best score), but cannot find it right now. I think it's a relatively well known number.
Here having no credit cards is best. Because not having to loan shows having the ability of being responsible financially.
Note: here in Europe we get no rewards or anything on credit cards. It's viewed more as a liability, not a virtue.
In fact my credit cards cost money in stamp duty, they don't ever gain me any.
So say if I spend $3000 a month, and pay it off every month in full, and my total credit limit is $10,000, they will ding me regardless of my payment history, because my utilization (30%+) is considered high. So if I want to maximize my credit score, it behooves me to get more cards (easiest way to increase total credit), and spread out the payments among them.
Assume you have a card for restaurants, one of travel, one for grocery’s, one for gas, one for entertainment and one catch all.
That’s 6. What else do you have a dedicated card for? 14 cards with sign up bonuses? All at the same time, each with minimum spending requirements to earn that bonus?
Let’s add some more. I have one card that pays $25 every quarter that I pay off in full every month so I use it once every month. I have a card with rotating categories. Even with multiple rotating categories I don’t see this going up past 12 cards.
Sure, why do I need my savings account in my apple pay? Why did I put the plastic savings card into my physical wallet? Because that's where all of my other plastic cards are.
"The digital wallet should be able to hold all of my cards, even the ones I use infrequently" would certainly be my expectation.
It's actually a really good idea, because it's a different account number they gets stored on the device, so, even if your hotel card is compromised because of the hotel leak, the copy in Google Pay will remain active and available. So, I could use it right away on the once-every-two-years bonus category without any extra hassle.
So in Denmark many see no reason to more than a single card.
BTW. We don't have a concept like "credit score" at all.
eg, Card A has no overseas transaction fees and has good exchange rate so I use it when travelling. Card B is same but I set a ridiculously low credit limit so I can use it in dodgy souvenir shops without worry. Card C gives airport lounge access. Card D gives free magazine and bottled water in the airport post-security areas. Card E grants access to clubhouses that are normally members-only, which I use for business meetings. Card F gets discounts for movie tickets, Card G to H gives free coffee upgrade from different chains, etc. And then there are a bunch that was pushed onto me when I got mortgage or a investment funds, that I never bothered to cancel since there's no annual fees and occasionally they'd have a promotion where it's actually useful.
I wouldn't want to carry all these physical cards, so I don't have them "in my wallet" per se, which is why it's nice to be able to add them all to my phone.
Normal people do not have 20 credit cards. Even people I know who have several cards, often only have a couple they actually use on a daily basis. This is not a real problem.
This is not even about credit cards. Debit counts, too. Say you have two bank accounts, an HSA account, one premium card, one business credit card, one everyday card, one… Oops, out of slots already!
It sounds like you're really happy with Apple products, and will simply change your life around them, instead of demanding something better. 6+ cards is probably already the average for many people.
I'd hazard most people have two or three cards tops.
For example, I have 11 Chase credit cards, and all of them are in Google Pay on Android. I almost never use the hotel ones; they simply provide other benefits for the annual fee, like the free hotel night for each annual fee renewal. But sometimes they do run bonus spend promotions, that's where once every year I can simply use those cards through Android/Google Pay on Android without having to worry about finding the physical card that I only use once a year.
This means anyone even slightly above average is already out.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to wear tall jeans just because you're above average. That's what Apple does on the technology front.
[0]: https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/what-is-credit-c...
People carrying all those cards to churn or min-max their rewards are already paying with the inconvenience of managing all those accounts.
All the Chase credits cards show up under a single login; you can pretty much simply login once a month a pay all 9 or 11 of them at once. Or setup auto-pay. Or change the due-date to be the exact same date for all of them, so you only have to login and pay exactly once a month.
I have all 11 of Chase credit cards in Google Pay. If I switch phones, they're already available for verification on the new phone, you don't have to type the whole number anymore. I keep all but 3 to 5 credit cards in a sock drawer; but I can still use any one of them 20 at any time thanks to Google Pay.
When I need to use any one of my 20 cards to make a purchase, simply scroll through and select, based on picture and/or description. If vendor doesn't accept contactless, simply use one of the 5 physical cards I do carry.
The only inconvenience is that it doesn't work on iPhone, and that's one of the reasons I don't use iPhone as a primary phone, because so many things don't work there.
Why wouldn't you want to add all the cards you have to your wallet? Because your $699 iPhone doesn't support the feature?
There's no single magic number thats your credit score, other than the one credit reference agencies provide, which no bank worth their salt uses, making that number meaningless.
Banks buy credit files from reference agencies, which contain hundreds of different data points for each individual. Then the bank use their own internal models to calculate credit risk, or identify customers they like. That model will be different at every bank, and for every class of product they sell.
If this wasn’t true, then there would be no differentiation between lenders, other than interest rate. Leaders use their own secret sauce models to help them identify and classify specific groups of individuals that meet their risk appetite. And they won’t just be optimising for repayment or profit, they’ll also be looking to ensure their loan book is highly diverse. Ensuring they’re not overexposed to big events (like, say, a global pandemic), which might disproportionately impact a subset of customers (such as people working in hospitality).
So the idea that 20 cards is some magic number for a good “credit score” is just crap. And grossly underestimates both the diversity and complexity of credit decisioning.
That basically represents the idea customer for a bank.
If you can add all of them to a tiny device, and they all come from just a few banks that provide a unified interface to manage 10 cards at a time, and/or set them all up for auto-pay, then why wouldn't you want to make the most out of all the offers and bonuses?
There are hardware limits on how many you can put in an iPhone, just like there are limits to how many you can stuff into a wallet. Most wallets won't fit 20 cards, either.
I fail to understand how can anyone claim that an 8-card limit in a digital wallet on a 32GB+ device is reasonable, when you can literally store more cards than that even in an average physical wallet.
And, again, Android's NFC and Google Pay have no such limits.
Loyalty cards are unlimited. I have dozens of those.
In Android Pay and now rebranded as Google Pay all contactless was and is unlimited. You never have to delete any card. You only have to re-verify the cards if you switch devices. That's literally how a digital wallet is meant to be, if you ask me.
None of your comments seem to show any realization that this is not a problem almost anyone faces. I do not have to delete and re-verify cards all the time — you do.
And I don't have to delete any cards either, because for my daily driver I use actual professional devices that run Android instead of the "Pro" gimmicks without Pro features that Apple makes. Apple Pay is useless, so they get what they deserve: $0.00 spend from me because I'm not using it just for one card when I can use all of my cards in Android.
It's mind boggling how people will go to such great lengths to defend such a silly 7-card limit. Or all these suggestions that imply that carrying 20 cards is impractical, when they literally all fit into any Google device of same size as an iPhone. This whole thread and the downvotes are really a travesty. You'd think people on HN would know better than ignore the obvious. But I guess Apple fans are toxic and stubborn regardless of the forum.
Casual reminder that you're not supposed to downvote comments you simply disagree with, but only comments that are incorrect or don't contribute to a healthy discussion. But the Apple fans don't seen to care about such etiquette, and the net score of anyone saying anything that's not positive of Apple appears to be in the negative even here on HN that's supposed to be free of such obvious bias and fanatism.
Also, this isn't a missing feature but an arbitrary limitation, so again, Apple doesn't need to "cater to it", just raise an int in the source code from 6 to 20 or whatever.
No, it's an element of the hardware design.
It's blatantly absurd to have that much extra security for something that's fundamentally insecure anyways.
Not to say there’s no legitimate use case for 8+ cards in Apple Pay, but I’m having a hard time envisioning it.
To the story itself: we’re at an interesting junction where your “phone” is absolutely a company’s product and they should be able to define the experience, but also becoming an essential utility in many societies where certain limitations are harmful. I’m still unsure where I land on some of these cases.
Well good for you. But there are tons of cards that give $ directly in your bank account instead of Amazon account and at a better rate as well. e.g. Chase Freedom has 5% cashback categories every quarter that can be converted into real dollars at 1:1 rate. So...
I just need one debit card and thats it.
I have also a credit card that is needed by car rentals. And use it only there.
And I don't carry around my card because it is something I can forget. And I always carry a phone, so why have two if I need only one. Not to mention limits on pinless payments are higher in Google/Apple pay.
What would you do if you need to rent a car, but your bank is down, and cannot authorise the payment?
The cards I have actually pay me back in rewards for having them. Why would I NOT have as many as they'll give me?
Most of my 20 cards come from just 3 issuers (Chase being the one who gave me the most cards), so, it's not even like it's even an issue from the management perspective, because each card is free (or even net negative cost) to own and operate, and it costs about the same amount of time to service them by the dozen as it would take to service just one of them.
This is end-of-the-world type scenario, you can prepare but should you go always prepared for it?
> The cards I have actually pay me back in rewards for having them. Why would I NOT have as many as they'll give me?
OK, that might be some countries specific, but in my country debit/credit (debits are way way more popular here) there are usually no rewards for paying and juggling cards to save 1-2% is not worth it - had once such card, after 6 months they resigned from such rewards and choosing card to use even on phone is a PITA instead of using the default one.
And this was just an exception, usually you don't get rewards unless you have an expensive credit card that gives you mile rewards, but for that you really need to use that card everywhere to make it worth it - so again no need for other cards.
This is EU-PL specific point of view.
I think a few years ago one UK bank had a downtime of a few days on their payment network. Wasn't that limited to a single bank? If you don't have to pay an annual fee for a credit card, why would you not at least have a few, to avoid such a scenario?
Plus, bank-specific individual account lockouts are far more common worldwide, or customer service and unlock department might be having technical issues. None of this is the end of the world for anyone who has several credit cards.
I use a single bank for the last 15 years, there was no issue with it that would cause me to not be able to use my money.
They usually have scheduler work during some weekend nights, and I don't remember any large scale issue besides that - for sure I didn't have a scenario where I was without money.
For such scenario it is better to have some cash (which I do, but for other reasons - e.g. paying nanny or some workers that don't accept card payments).
I stopped carrying cash like 10 years ago. Even banks themselves recommend having more than one card just in case an issue occurs, to ensure you're not left stranded.
This strikes me differently from the App Store issues. There Apple is dealing with 3rd parties and trying to create a playing field where they allow competitors on their platform, i.e. Apple Music and Spotify. Here Apple built their NFC chip for their own use and for their own product. If another company wants to provide NFC capability for credit cards, they can and the actual credit cards already do.
The other companies wants to provide NFC capabilities for their mobile bank/direct payment app. Like Norwegian “Vipps”, direct instant payments between any Norwegian bank.
Could be wrong though, as I haven't followed it closely, being an Android user.
> If you build it, they will take it away from you. That's the European market for you and compounding legal issues like this make it a difficult one to foster innovation in.
Now that a really stupid statement, what does it even mean? Europe is a bad guy that goes from house to house to steal kids drawing? Europe bashing every time there's a form of regulation is really exhausting. So Europe should be a lawless place?
As far as access to the payment system itself, I also don't quite understand: if you have access to the NFC interface you can can presumably build your own payment system (e.g. google pay could in theory run on the iPhone -- is that what they mean?
(I"m not sure if this was the EU's complaint, but it's why I've always thought Apple Pay was anti-competitive.)
Developers do not get access to the low-level NFC interface but a set of APIs that allows to use NFC, but in a restricted way.
Apple does not seem to allow developers to use contact-less payment, making Apple Pay a monopoly on iOS, hence the antirtrust case.
There is still no technical ability for 3rd party payment apps to be able to be used from the lock screen like Apple Pay, and according to other comments Apple Pay has some special hardware access (to be able to work faster?).
Actually it's to store the payment credentials. Basically, you need a SE (secure element) that's physically tied to the NFC chip to handle payments if you want to be able to get banks to issue permanent keys you can use to sign. Some Android phones may support this (not sure), but Android Pay works a bit differently in that they're issued some small fixed number of single use tokens for payments that expire every 30 days and have to do a network attestation that they've kept the tokens secure to refresh them. Part of the attestation is a confirmation that the device isn't root kitted (this is done via complex fingerprinting that Google Play Services performs to try to detect running on a root kitted phone).
It wouldn't surprise me in this case that bank requirements aren't a part of how Apple structured this system as a lot of this was developed before the banks had their shit together (Apple had to use a third party to manage some crypto keys whereas newer iterations of the standard remove the trusted partner). That being said, it also wouldn't surprise me if Apple did this to retain a monopoly over the payment infrastructure in their ecosystem as that's extremely strategic for them in the long term (e.g. Apple Card). There are also UX reasons why it makes sense to do the way they did (at least initially) but maybe there are ways to design out of it to allow for 3p partners.
Every 3rd question on the Twint forums is a request to implement payment via watch but that ain't happening as long as Apple block this and they will not enable a feature only for Android users.
Can I ask why not? Seems a shame to leave such a large user base on the table.
However, it didn't actually work very well. You have to do several button presses and taps on the phone, during which it launches very slowly, and once you get to the payment part it often failed for whatever reason. "Multiple cards detected", "payment denied", whatever. It was quicker to fish the card out of my wallet and much less stressful.
PS: The card I paid with when it failed was the exact same card that I had linked to Samsung Pay, there were no balance issues :)
My Samsung Galaxy watch has had an EKG sensor for longer than it has taken for Apple to add their own. It's technologically superior, and also has a circular face instead of being a big square block, and has better battery life since I can get a good 2 days or more out of it. But ultimately it is also as bad as Apple because it only works well with Samsung's ecosystem.
The whole point about Apple (for decades) is vertical integration, building hardware and software specifically optimized for the said hardware. That’s what Apple is in it’s core, that’s why they’ve been revolutionizing industries and that’s why iPhones, iPads and MacBooks are most performant and battery efficient consumer devices for years.
It’s like saying - “There aren’t any good consoles really. Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo aren’t good console manufacturers when their consoles only know how to talk to other PlayStation/Xbox/Nintendo services and actively prevent compatibility with other systems.”
To be fair that point did improve in the last few years. In the past, cross-platform online play wasn't even a thing.
They're opening up because they're competing against eachothers, while Apple is doing whatever it can to avoid open standards with their devices. Unless the standard itself is too big to avoid and not adopting it would put them at a disadvantage.
> MacBooks are most performant
Huh? MacBooks have the same performance as corresponding Windows laptops. That only slightly changed with M1, but it doesn't seem anything to do with vertical integration, and rather just the result of buying out 5nm production.
Also there is complete lack of models with Nvidia GPUs, so they are a lackluster in graphics.
Whether or not that's a worthwhile tradeoff: I dunno! No doubt it depends on exact numbers, lifetime expected value, potential word-of-mouth damage, etc.
Apple literally copied half of the Android long after stuff made it to Android. They've even copied Swype keyboard like 10 years later!
Light up a fire under their feet, have the userbase put some pressure on Apple if they're unhappy about the situation.
Since 2019, more and more banks have started enabling regular mobile payments, so it's going to be interesting to see where that leaves Twint (I've never used it, so I have no idea what reasons one would have to use it over NFC payments, other than lack of support by one's card provider).
https://www.moneyland.ch/en/apple-pay-google-pay-swiss-banks...
The biggest "scam" going on now is the banks specifically Visa pushing their garbage Debit card. For users it seems great as it's cheaper no fee thing, however for vendors it is a nightmare. The fees are astronomical over regular credit cards yet they have to accept them if they want to accept Visa's credit card. Visa found another legal loop hole they can milk and they are going all the way.
The potential fees involved would be more of a concern for the vendors, it seems to me. Are you saying that Visa debit cards have higher fees than their credit cards? My understanding was that usually it's the other way around.
Visa has higher fees not for the customer but for the vendors. It's specifically a problem in Switzerland where the "Maestro" bank cards are being replaced with Visa Debit which is being pushed by the banks. The benefit for the custom is they can use those visa cards online but the fees at the store for the vendor are up to 260 times higher. [1]
[1] https://www.srf.ch/news/schweiz/neue-debitkarten-visa-und-ma...
It's probably why NFC is not universal on Android as well.
The country wide standard BankAxept, that has low fees (0.024USD per transaction), is used for almost all other card transactions, but Apple use their NFC monopoly to charge stores exorbiant VISA network fees when people use their Apple devices to pay. If the blockage of BankAxept on Apple Pay is allowed to continue it could cost the Norwegian economy hundreds of millions of dollars in just monopoly fees.
That "great source of income" contributes less than 1% of EU income.
In France, you can't store a metro card on your iPhone, because Apple won't open up NFC. You can do it on Android.
Yet, I don't want banks to drop Apple Pay support, and force you to use their poorly coded app for payments. Imagine having many cards, for personal and business, joint cards and foreign cards, thankfully many banks on Android end up supporting GPay, but many still force you to use their custom app and don't give you a choice. How many years did your bank take before adopting Touch ID? For me and some of you, it's measured in years.
Apple shouldn't be able to block third-party NFC use, but should be entitled to force banks to make Apple Pay-compatible equivalents (when applicable) in addition to whatever custom stuff they decide to roll out.
Without a doubt, they'd roll their own fragmented/compromised implementation of contactless payments on iOS, if they had the choice.
Not quite the same, but so many large corps in Canada don't offer Wallet integration for their relevant products (loyalty cards, points balances, etc.) They instead have their own app for these, and let me tell you: they are all garbage.
It's incredible convenient. No need to use the fare machines -- just top up using the Apple Wallet app. Sounds like it's coming to Paris soon: https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/06/apple-to-support-paris-...
Which metro cards? Navigo have been supported all year.
Apple's hardware doesn't allow for arbitrary card emulation - the logic has to run inside the Secure Enclave, and AFAIK that is an atomic block of firmware shipped along with the OS. No third party code allowed.
But they have added that secure enclave support for the various metro card networks, including "express pay" where NFC functions like metro cards will work even with the phone powered down due to low battery.
My understanding is that do to patent royalties wanted by the underlying Calypso system, it was not merged into ISO 14443 and deviates in a few ways.
Apple has historically implemented more of their NFC stack in hardware than other implementations, so there may be limitations as a result of the with communication with a card reader.
Tl;dr: - Banks agreed to pay Apple 0.15% of transactions
- Payment networks allowed them to select which banks and which cards would be supported. The industry standard is, if you support one card you have to support all
- Somehow, the payment networks convinced Apple to agree not to compete with them by creating their own payment network in exchange for favorable terms
Pretty surprised so many people even in tech are OK with yet another entity knowing your purchase history.
I wish I could just make my phone emulate the contactless CC I have, that would be so mush simpler.
Did you know that you can use Android NFC to read the full 16-digit card number of any contactless card, including the Apple Pay cards from an iOS device? The ones that are so secure you can't even see them within the interface of Apple Pay itself? And which have to be stored in a special storage on the device such that you're limited to only 8 or 12 cards, depending on the generation of the Apple Pay device?
I don't think you can even do that on an iPhone, since Apple Pay is apparently the only app that's allowed to use the NFC chip.
CoreNFC: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/corenfc