EU to Accuse Apple of Unfairly Blocking Third-Party Access to NFC Payment Technology on iPhone [Press release added]

[darknessblade]

Summary

Apple will be accused of breaking EU law by unfairly limiting access of its mobile payment system on iPhone to third-party service providers, such as PayPal and Venmo, according to the Financial Times, citing sources familiar with the matter.

 

Quotes

Quote

MacRumors

According to the report, Apple will be accused of "unfairly blocking groups such as PayPal and leading banks from accessing its mobile wallet system" by the European Union and could face heavy penalties if the accusation moves forward. In specific, the EU is taking issue with Apple's restriction of NFC technology on the ‌iPhone‌, which Apple does not allow third-party app developers to access.

By limiting access to the NFC chip, services such as PayPal, Venmo, banks, and other financial providers, are unable to provide a similar experience to that of Apple Pay for ‌iPhone‌ users. Apple claims that its restrictions on NFC are in place as a safeguard for user privacy and security.

 

My thoughts

Disclaimer: Please note: As I am as Anti-apple as it can get. My opinion might be Biased.

------

This is nothing but good news, In the EU Mobile and wireless payment methods are widespread, and used by many that can use it with their phones, By using their banking app, it is a simple tap on the terminal with your phone, and you can go,

 

-Unlike the USA where this adoption is slow to start, and rejected by many people.

[which I am certain Apple will start to use as a excuse, by Citing global statistics, instead of EU_ONLY statistics, during the lawsuit]

----

Apple bitching about that it is a safely feature is nothing but utter BS, Just like with the appstore/3rd party payment methods they are showing their true colors. of wanting FULL control on IOS devices. 

Getting FULL access to customers banking info, and user spending habits, trough the info gathered by apple_pay might also be against the GDPR

----

It is sad that it has to come to a lawsuit. as apple has had plenty of times of building a working alternative, that does not rely on banks being forced to integrate their apple_pay feature/software, After the lawsuit concludes in the EU's victory, European banking apps could Finally use the NFC chip that is build into Iphones, Its highly likely that apple will resist, But at least it is a win for the consumer, as they can use their own banks SAFE and Reliable banking app for wireless payment methods.

 

Press release

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_2764

Sources

https://www.macrumors.com/2022/04/28/apple-breaking-eu-law-iphone-nfc-chip/

https://soundsnerdy.com/tech-news-main/apple/eu-set-to-announce-new-anticompetitive-charges-against-apple-next-week-targeting-dominance-of-apple-pay-in-iphone/

https://techtelegraph.co.uk/apple-to-face-fresh-antitrust-charges-in-brussels/

https://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/980840/apple-to-face-additional-eu-antitrust-charges-980840.html

https://www.ft.com/content/44e93ede-60b5-4eb2-8548-61ad13a7550e

Older articles:

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/el/ip_20_1075

https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/06/eu-plans-antitrust-charges-apple-pay/

https://www.xda-developers.com/apple-faces-antitrust-charges-over-nfc-chip-and-app-store-payment-rules/

https://www.gizmochina.com/2021/10/07/apple-europe-iphone-nfc-antitrust/

https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-eu-antitrust-regulators-charge-apple-over-its-nfc-chip-tech-sources-2021-10-06/

https://9to5mac.com/2019/11/15/use-nfc-chip/

Wireless payment methods Adoptation and information

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/digital_euro/investigation/profuse/shared/files/dedocs/ecb.dedocs220330_report.en.pdf

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/29/why-mobile-payments-have-barely-caught-on-in-the-us.html

https://www.statista.com/forecasts/997133/mobile-payments-by-situation-in-the-us

https://www.statista.com/topics/3946/digital-payment-methods-in-europe/

[Senzelian]

Should a company be able to do what they like to do with their own hardware and software?

Of course it'd be great if Paypal and others are able to provide a similar experience to Apple pay on the iPhone, but shouldn't that be the choice of the people? If people really had a problem with that, wouldn't they simply buy more Android devices instead? Isn't Paypal on Android the competition to Apple pay instead of Paypal on iOS?

Just something to think about...

[CTR640]

Really, anything that Apple doesn't like, their first bullshit excuse is "security and privacy". Seriously, fuck off with that behavior.

 

1 minute ago, Senzelian said:

Should a company be able to do what they like to do with their own hardware and software?

Of course it'd be great if Paypal and others are able to provide a similar experience to Apple pay on the iPhone, but shouldn't that be the choice of the people? If people really had a problem with that, wouldn't they simply buy more Android devices instead? Isn't Paypal on Android the competition to Apple pay instead of Paypal on iOS?

Just something to think about...

The problem is, there are too much iSh, eh I mean Apple lovers. Or they just want Apple because it's Apple and not Banana. Or Pear.

Android is not good either but less restrictive.

[Senzelian]

Just now, CTR640 said:

The problem is, there are too much iSh, eh I mean Apple lovers. Or they just want Apple because it's Apple and not Banana. Or Pear.

Android is not good either but less restrictive.

Nah, that's too easy of an explenation.

The benefits of using an iPhone, no matter what they are to each individual person, simply outweigh this specific issue. Clearly Apple pay works just fine and people are not interested in changing that.

I have to say tho, before Apple pay worked in Germany, Android users were already using Paypal to pay with their phone. A friend of mine was noticeably jealous when I payed with my phone, while he wasn't able to do that. 

[Lord Bloobus]

Paying with my phone feels fancier and more convenient than pulling out a card. Not really any reason to lock it up besides that sweet transaction fee money.

[Kisai]

25 minutes ago, CTR640 said:

Really, anything that Apple doesn't like, their first bullshit excuse is "security and privacy". Seriously, fuck off with that behavior.

 

Cause it's true? When the "next most popular" device is full of holes.

 

And in the case of NFC, that is not something dictated by Apple, that's dictated by the EMV (Europay,Mastercard,Visa) standard, and one of the rules is that software on the device is not permitted to interact with the POS.

 

This is why if you ever bought something from the Apple store, their iphones have this chonky PINpad. The pinpad is the EMV-compliant chipcard reader. Now, that said, you can see how stupid this is with NFC payments when there is no PIN to potentially capture.

https://www.emvco.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/A_Guide_to_EMV_Chip_Technology_v2.0_20141120122132753.pdf

 

Like the reason why you needed an external contactless/chip card reader to use Square or Paypal with physical presence payments is because EMV does not permit it.

 

Those "microphone" square readers basically read the magstripe, which was the same as manually entering the card numbers. Nothing to protect.

 

If you use a physical chip card reader and stick in any chip card, it will tell you the numbers from the physical card in addition to the applications it supports and various other fun information. I can not, however initiate a EMV payment with the card reader because I do not have the bank's software to operate it and do the merchant account transaction.

 

This is where Square, Paypal, and even Apple would like you be able to just NFC pay each other without involving a pair of banks. Paypal sucks, a lot, and for various reasons, I would tell people not to use Paypal unless you're in the US. It's ultimately super-fustrating to use Paypal outside the US, because Paypal is unwilling to allow foreigners with US bank accounts use their US bank accounts. Likewise, Paypal is ultimately worthless unless you are paying in USD. You are better off using Transferwise if you are involved a lot of international payments.

 

Which is the problem that we seem to not want to overcome. I want to be able whip out my iphone and may my sister, friend, cousin, or food-cart person with their iphone/android phone, all without involving mastercard, visa, interac, or whatever.

 

Money laundering rules is why this doesn't happen. Potentially stolen cards is why this doesn't happen.

 

Ultimately I would like to be able to pay or accept payments in USD and CAD without having to convert between them, just have two balances and deal with USD with USD and CAD with CAD, and not be forced by Paypal and Steam to pay in CAD when I 'm buying something clearly priced in USD. You know, unlike Amazon where if I want to buy something in USD, I can goto AMAZON.COM and buy the thing in USD and have it shipped from the US.

[Vishera]

Lawyers: I like the smell of anti-trust in the morning.

I wonder how much money Apple spends on anti-trust lawyers.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

If people really had a problem with that, wouldn't they simply buy more Android devices instead?

That's assuming people want to use Android over iOS and this is some huge factor as to why, and even if it were the case that still doesn't discount the issue of actually preferring iOS over Android and wanting to use features of the device with any App (those that are cleared and already on the App Store).

 

The whole just use Android just isn't a good enough reason or excuse. "I got stabbed today, but I'm glad I didn't get shot like last week". Not every option or alternative is good because it's "better" than the other one 

 

Something on Android is not competition to something on iOS, that's not how it works. Competition on iOS is multiple applications that can and are allowed to offer competing and equivalent services.

[leadeater]

21 minutes ago, Vishera said:

Lawyers: I like the smell of anti-trust in the morning.

I wonder how much money Apple spends on anti-trust lawyers.

Probably more than the 100 companies directly behind them combined lol

[RejZoR]

54 minutes ago, CTR640 said:

Really, anything that Apple doesn't like, their first bullshit excuse is "security and privacy". Seriously, fuck off with that behavior.

 

The problem is, there are too much iSh, eh I mean Apple lovers. Or they just want Apple because it's Apple and not Banana. Or Pear.

Android is not good either but less restrictive.

While I'm on this one to have NFC functionality unlocked, I still don't understand the monumental whining of people over Apple. Ok, we get it, you don't like Apple. Just buy an Android phone then. Surely, if everyone hated iPhones so much, everyone would have Android phone and iPhone sales would sink into lowest lows. Yet that just isn't happening. How come? Usual excuse fro haters is "they just want it because of the logo". Really? That's the best argument?

 

Then again, I had NFC payment on Android and it was super sketchy. Most of the time it crapped itself on checkout so I had to pull out a physical card and I always had to have it with me because I was never sure if it would work or not. Which kinda defeats the purpose of it if you can't rely on it. On iPhone, it's strictly through their system and so far it has always worked flawlessly. Sure, my bank doesn't support their system, so I had to use something like Revolut, N26 or Curve, but it's doable if you really want NFC payment.

 

Android may have bunch of options, but they are mostly all half assed. Apple is more restrictive and has their own rules, but stuff just works and that's why people usually want iPhones. Not becaue they love the logo so much or love closed ecosystems, it's this reliability and simplicity for most things and that attracts people.

 

I was long years Android user and I adapted to iPhone entirely. Some compromises, but I haven't been this happy with a smartphone in years when I draw the line and sum things up.

[Senzelian]

19 minutes ago, leadeater said:

That's assuming people want to use Android over iOS and this is some huge factor as to why,

That's exactly what I wrote:

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

The benefits of using an iPhone, no matter what they are to each individual person, simply outweigh this specific issue.

 

20 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Something on Android is not competition to something on iOS, that's not how it works

That is absolutely how this works. If I am inbetween two operating systems, then something like specifically this issue, could be the factor that makes me select one OS over another. That's competition. On top of that, even credit card companies and banks are competing here with Apple. Everyone that offers a payment method competes with Apple Pay in this sense. 

[Mark Kaine]

11 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

Everyone that offers a payment method competes with Apple Pay in this sense. 

But not *on* apple, thats the difference. And that makes apple "anti-competitive" which is against the law. And its totally fine for you to be against this law, but then you need to change law and explain whats wrong with it in the first place. Which will be difficult because you seem to think anti competitive behavior is

 

11 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

competition

 

2 hours ago, darknessblade said:

Apple claims that its restrictions on NFC are in place as a safeguard for user privacy and security.

This line is getting old fast...

 

1 hour ago, CTR640 said:

Really, anything that Apple doesn't like, their first bullshit excuse is "security and privacy". Seriously, fuck off with that behavior.

yup, they got it coming. 

[AndreiArgeanu]

35 minutes ago, Kisai said:

And in the case of NFC, that is not something dictated by Apple, that's dictated by the EMV (Europay,Mastercard,Visa) standard, and one of the rules is that software on the device is not permitted to interact with the POS.

Maybe in the US, but this is the EU we're talking about. With my Android phone I can put my card straight into the google pay app and use it as if I had the physical card with me, of course only with contactless payments which are limited to 100£ just like on a normal card. It's simple to use and works with the already existing card readers. So I guess my device can interact with the POS which seems to go against the rules dictated by EMV despite having a Visa card.

20 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Then again, I had NFC payment on Android and it was super sketchy. Most of the time it crapped itself on checkout so I had to pull out a physical card and I always had to have it with me because I was never sure if it would work or not. Which kinda defeats the purpose of it if you can't rely on it.

Never had such issue with google pay and never needed to use a separate bank since basically most if not all banks in the UK support Google Pay.

[Mark Kaine]

14 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

That is absolutely how this works. If I am inbetween two operating systems, then something like specifically this issue, could be the factor that makes me select one OS over another. That's competition.

And here is why its the opposite,  its anti-competitive :

 

 

So, you have 2 competing OS's/companies...

 

 

OS1: allows any other payment service, even though they have their own payment service as well, they don't do this out of nicety, they do this because its required by law (anti trust, anti monopoly, etc)

 

OS2: doesn't allow any other payment services because they simply would want to get any proceeds and data collection for themselves instead of sharing with others,  knowing full well that this is against the laws, but they think they'll get away with it anyways. 

 

 

How is this "fair" or "competitive" in any way and how do you explain that one company has to follow the rules while the other company simply doesn't have to follow the same rules? 

 

[RejZoR]

25 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Maybe in the US, but this is the EU we're talking about. With my Android phone I can put my card straight into the google pay app and use it as if I had the physical card with me, of course only with contactless payments which are limited to 100£ just like on a normal card. It's simple to use and works with the already existing card readers. So I guess my device can interact with the POS which seems to go against the rules dictated by EMV despite having a Visa card.

Never had such issue with google pay and never needed to use a separate bank since basically most if not all banks in the UK support Google Pay.

Not GooglePay, in my case, bank had its own app that used NFC for payment.

[Senzelian]

28 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

But not *on* apple, thats the difference. And that makes apple "anti-competitive" which is against the law.

No one is arguing that it isn't anti-competitive.
My question is simply: Should the government decide who Apple has to do business with?
 

28 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Which will be difficult because you seem to think anti competitive behavior is

No I don't think that.
 

10 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

And here is why its the opposite,  its anti-competitive :

Anti-competitive behavior is part of Competition.
The opposite of anti-competitive is competitive. The opposite of competition is cooperation.

There is a significant distinction between competition and competitive.

[wanderingfool2]

The way I look at it, if their argument is that it's for the user's privacy by not allowing the technology to be used by competitors then either they don't care about your privacy because they are building in something that is vulnerable into the phone so that they could use it or they are just using it as an excuse.  Either way it's not really about privacy.

 

13 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

My question is simply: Should the government decide who Apple has to do business with?

Yes, just like how the government stepped in with Microsoft and IE.  When a company hits a certain size, and acts the way they do there needs to be added regulations in place to make them play fair.  I know there is the age old argument by people that Apple isn't a monopoly (and that there is consumer choice), but living in an area where there has been duopolies it really should be extended to mean any company who has significant power over the market.

 

Take for example that Apple is able to create Apple pay, and now credit card companies aren't allowed creating their own alternative so Apple is using their power in the smartphone market to get users away from the credit card companies.  From there Apple is able to demand lower fees and such from the credit card companies or they risk not having theirs listed on a decently used payment platform.

 

There is also the classical, but consumers can choose Android, but that completely ignores the developer side of things.  Large companies would get criticized if they created just an app for Android or just and App for iPhones.  So developers really don't have much of a choice when it comes to picking and choosing where they go.

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Should a company be able to do what they like to do with their own hardware and software?

Not necessarily, depends on market penetration.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220315IPR25504/deal-on-digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-competition-and-more-choice-for-users
(for example) 

Of course it'd be great if Paypal and others are able to provide a similar experience to Apple pay on the iPhone,

Sure.

but shouldn't that be the choice of the people?

Yes, but Apple doesn't give people this choice...

 

If people really had a problem with that, wouldn't they simply buy more Android devices instead?

Maybe they like Apple hardware better?

 

Isn't Paypal on Android the competition to Apple pay instead of Paypal on iOS?

.......but only because Apple doesn't allow it.....
 

 

29 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

My question is simply: Should the government decide who Apple has to do business with?

Which is your good right to ask. But generally yes, very much so, because its in the interest of everyone in a society, since we otherwise end up with monopolies/duopolies anywhere... which we're honestly almost already anyway - but this is exactly why regulations are needed.

 

29 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

Anti-competitive behavior is part of Competition.

It is, sure, but it has to follow rules:

 

Quote

 

What are examples of potentially unlawful anti-competitive conduct?

 

• Exclusive dealing
• Imposing minimum resale prices
• Misuse of market power
• Refusal to supply products or services
• Unconscionable conduct ...

 

 

As i said you can argue that these rules should not apply or exist, but since this is a discussion forum, you should also explain why those rules shouldn't exist. You cannot say, these rules dont exist or apply just because you dont like them. 

[Kisai]

49 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Maybe in the US, but this is the EU we're talking about. With my Android phone I can put my card straight into the google pay app and use it as if I had the physical card with me, of course only with contactless payments which are limited to 100£ just like on a normal card. It's simple to use and works with the already existing card readers.

There's two different things we are talking about. To have Google or Apple be able to use the device as a "Virtual card", there has to be an intermediate mechanic that is approved by EMV and the bank card issuer. There was a reason why this rolled out in the US first, the US HAS NOT and STILL NOT adopted chip+pin cards. Apple Pay for a few years was the only way to use your card securely, and foreigners coming to the US don't want to use the magstripe on insecure american magstripe readers.

 

The rest of the world got the jump on the US, and can readily issue magstripe-less cards if they want, and that is effectively what a smartphone NFC card is.

 

That said, software that can interact with the NFC has to be EMV approved otherwise you'll have software that intercepts the NFC tokens to double-spend or change the values without the user seeing it. A double-spend happens when the same token and nonce gets used, resulting in the next transaction the user attempts failing because the next nonce already got used.

 

49 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

So I guess my device can interact with the POS which seems to go against the rules dictated by EMV despite having a Visa card.

No no, there's two things here, There is the device acting as a NFC "card" which requires an existing approved card from an existing bank, and then there is the device acting as a "NFC" POS, which is what some bank apps want and also which is what Paypal and Square would need. 

49 minutes ago, AndreiArgeanu said:

Never had such issue with google pay and never needed to use a separate bank since basically most if not all banks in the UK support Google Pay.

 

American Express (issued by American Express, not bank branded card) for like an entire year was the only NFC card that supported Apple Pay in Canada, and the only reason I have it. Had any Canadian bank stopped their handwringing long enough to get their cards out there first, I wouldn't have needed it. So as a result 80% of my card spending is now AMEX instead of Mastercard. 

 

So I have a lot of experience with bleeding edge usage here. 

1) Some stores do not accept AMEX but accept Apple Pay. The payment will fail, and the POS operator will kind of look at you funny as you try again with another card

2) Some stores accept AMEX under Apple Pay, but their software fails to understand it's Apple Pay and asks for a PIN.

3) Canadian Banks were extremely late to the game on debit cards, as a result I've never used Interac with Apple Pay. I have no reason to.

 

Basically after the first two years of Apple Pay being available in Canada, most of the failures disappeared, and it's been flawless ever since as long as the store has a proper NFC POS and isn't using a proprietary system designed around their American stores POS software (which was the case with Target for that short time it was here, and also Walmart.)

 

Like it has to be said, security is the number one reason why you can't do a lot of things with NFC that involve payments. EMV will not approve hardware or software that the end user can not see the payment value before they tap the card, and will not approve hardware or software that can be tampered with by the hardware owner. NFC in a non-payment sense, is usually a non-issue.

 

[DANK_AS_gay]

Ok, I get the sideloading apps thing, if something did go wrong, it likely wouldn't harm anyone too much. But with data as sensitive as this? I dunno, in this case, Apple has responsibility if customers lose privacy (just like Sony was with the PSN hack that took it offline for 23 days.). This is the drawback for Apple, which incentivises them to not lose your data.

I see little issue with Apple controlling the actual functionality of the NFC, maybe there is an issue with blocking other companies from using it, which should be corrected, but Apple has the right to have it go through their system (on the phone itself). 

[Senzelian]

40 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

As i said you can argue that these rules should not apply or exist, but since this is a discussion forum, you should also explain why those rules shouldn't exist. You cannot say, these rules dont exist or apply just because you dont like them. 

Oh no no no. I don't argue against those rules. I think you're jumping ahead with your conclusions about my opionions.
I would simply like to see alternative ways of getting Apple, or any other company for that matter, to stop being anti-competitive. The only right way of doing so imo is simply by voting with your wallet and with feedback* and not by letting the government step in. That this doesn't work is very clear to me. I'm very much in favor of how our government (speaking about Germany and the EU) has handled this in the past.

To be honest, the questions that I asked weren't so much for me, as they were simply there to get a discussion going. I just want people to keep in mind that, while it is great that we have a government that steps in, we shouldn't rely on it and take matters in our own hands more often. Especially with an issue like this, I'd like to see people that have been customers of Apple to simply try an Android device for 14 days before they buy another Apple device. It can be easily returned, but at least its been given a chance. But I fear that people aren't even willing to do that and instead simply rely on someone else to take care of issues.
The most anti-competitive entitiy, is the consumer. (TM) lol

 

*Regarding feedback, specifically with software developement and large tech companies such as Apple, Microsoft and Google:
I read often that "they" (big tech companies) would never listen to the communitie's feedback. Well, if people go in with that attitude, then what exactly does it help to complain in a forum about that? Just write the damn feedback. It's like not voting... 

[Mark Kaine]

56 minutes ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

Ok, I get the sideloading apps thing, if something did go wrong, it likely wouldn't harm anyone too much. But with data as sensitive as this?

Its actually the same thing here again... a sideloaded app could possibly read those things too - also understand that apple doesn't actually disallow different payment methods (as i understand this) no - they simply dont allow access to the nfc chip, which makes anything other than apple pay not impossible,  but a pain and not practical. 

 

 

Its simply the same thing again like "sideloaded apps" apple wants any fees etc for themselves and no sharing the pie with others .

 

 

Which honestly is kind of understandable,  but its neither fair, nor allowed by law.

 

 

The "privacy and security" nonsense is again just bs, because they know thats what the majority of their customers will believe . . .  "oh, security... well go ahead, i dont need other payment methods then..."

 

*thisisfine.gif*

 

 

You should also consider what we're talking about here specifically,  so you would trust *Apple* more with security and privacy than your *own bank* (for example)?

 

I mean you do you, but its not super logical or anything  = )

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

There's two different things we are talking about. To have Google or Apple be able to use the device as a "Virtual card", there has to be an intermediate mechanic that is approved by EMV and the bank card issuer. There was a reason why this rolled out in the US first, the US HAS NOT and STILL NOT adopted chip+pin cards. Apple Pay for a few years was the only way to use your card securely, and foreigners coming to the US don't want to use the magstripe on insecure american magstripe readers.

 

The rest of the world got the jump on the US, and can readily issue magstripe-less cards if they want, and that is effectively what a smartphone NFC card is.

 

That said, software that can interact with the NFC has to be EMV approved otherwise you'll have software that intercepts the NFC tokens to double-spend or change the values without the user seeing it. A double-spend happens when the same token and nonce gets used, resulting in the next transaction the user attempts failing because the next nonce already got used.

 

No no, there's two things here, There is the device acting as a NFC "card" which requires an existing approved card from an existing bank, and then there is the device acting as a "NFC" POS, which is what some bank apps want and also which is what Paypal and Square would need. 

 

American Express (issued by American Express, not bank branded card) for like an entire year was the only NFC card that supported Apple Pay in Canada, and the only reason I have it. Had any Canadian bank stopped their handwringing long enough to get their cards out there first, I wouldn't have needed it. So as a result 80% of my card spending is now AMEX instead of Mastercard. 

 

So I have a lot of experience with bleeding edge usage here. 

1) Some stores do not accept AMEX but accept Apple Pay. The payment will fail, and the POS operator will kind of look at you funny as you try again with another card

2) Some stores accept AMEX under Apple Pay, but their software fails to understand it's Apple Pay and asks for a PIN.

3) Canadian Banks were extremely late to the game on debit cards, as a result I've never used Interac with Apple Pay. I have no reason to.

 

Basically after the first two years of Apple Pay being available in Canada, most of the failures disappeared, and it's been flawless ever since as long as the store has a proper NFC POS and isn't using a proprietary system designed around their American stores POS software (which was the case with Target for that short time it was here, and also Walmart.)

 

Like it has to be said, security is the number one reason why you can't do a lot of things with NFC that involve payments. EMV will not approve hardware or software that the end user can not see the payment value before they tap the card, and will not approve hardware or software that can be tampered with by the hardware owner. NFC in a non-payment sense, is usually a non-issue.

 

Actually it's not only that. In Slovenia, at least our national bank NLB and Addiko Bank are using Bankart processing system which is apparently incompatible with system Apple is using, which is why you can't connect their cards to ApplePay. I'm not sure, but it's very likely it wouldn't work with GooglePlay either. However, you can pair the card to service like Curve and then use Curve card which is compatible with ApplePay to pay for stuff using iPhone. I have yet to find a store that doesn't accept MasterCard. It's so widely used it's almost impossible to find one without support for it.

[DANK_AS_gay]

12 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

your *own bank* (for example)?

 

I mean you do you, but its not super logical or anything  = )

Apple Pay is literally using my Bank's credit card/debit card. They're still getting their "convenience fees". What I really don't want to happen is every bank having their own equally shitty apps so that they can capitalize on the chance to make the user experience worse. This is obviously and inevitably what would happen.

[wanderingfool2]

9 minutes ago, DANK_AS_gay said:

Apple Pay is literally using my Bank's credit card/debit card. They're still getting their "convenience fees". What I really don't want to happen is every bank having their own equally shitty apps so that they can capitalize on the chance to make the user experience worse. This is obviously and inevitably what would happen.

I don't want to do too much research into it, but I do suspect that Apple likely takes a chunk of those "convenience fees"...iirc they talked about it back in the day where they were big enough they could negotiate lower fees (could be wrong).  So the other companies would be getting reduced convenience fees.