What a fucking perfect example of a disconnected, ass-backwards, consumer hating decision. I mean, you REALLY need to have your head stuck up so far u your ass to make an executive decision like this.
Let's take a look at this payment process (coming in the future!)
1. Unlock your phone
2. Find the app
3. Launch the app
4. Point your QR code at a scanner, in a very specific position
5. Wait
Oh, and it needs access to your checking account. Yeah, this is gonna take off. Apple Pay has nothing on this. Where the **** do I sign up??
Well said. What an anti customer service payment system! Like Cook said in the keynote, all mobile payment systems have been designed to benefit the companies not the consumer. This is a huge F- You to consumers everywhere that is designed to have you compromise your bank account number with self serving merchants who want to collect data and possibly collect transaction fees directly from you instead of paying the banks. For the sole purpose of lining there pockets.
Remember that computers were going to create a paperless office? Thirty years of personal computing has killed more trees than any invention in the history of man. Ideally we should get both a digital copy of the receipt as well as a small piece of paper, rather than a full sheet 8.5 x 11 for each receipt you need to print out later. Not to mention the hassle of finding an AirPrint printer or emailing to your desktop and paying for the ink and paper.
Also remember that in the US all paper is required by law to be 70% recycled. So not as many trees as you would think. Also remember that trees for paper and lumber are farmed not unlike food and are planted and grown in tree farms and have been for a number of years now. Trees can be a cash crop too.
Do these retailers know NOTHING about the Apple faithful?
I think they could save themselves time, money and a shitheap of bad karma, if they would only come here to AI and read this thread.
Astonishingly dumb move.
"Faithful"? I hope you mean that in jest.
It's not a religious argument for most Apple users.
What's stupid is CVS / Rite Aid not letting their customers pay with whatever is convenient for them, just because CVS and Rite Aid are members of MCX and want to force CurrentC on their customers. It's just plain ugly and inconsiderate to their customers to remove NFC payment terminals for spurious reasons; and this affects Google Wallet users too.
Jest? Yes and No. The Apple user demographic is catholic to be sure and contains more than a hint of heroic persistency, never_say_die obstinacy and downright militancy - I've been around long enough to witness examples of all three. I would never bet against Apple and forcing users onto a less secure, more convoluted, freedom busting, cynical data mining hack.......is very likely to be picked up and thrown in their face by a fair proportion of that demographic.
No. It's not about religious fanaticism - it's far more guttural and insinctive.
PS. When I read any of the following...(Apple +) cult(ish), religious, fanatic, fanbois, mindless drones etc...any respect I may have had for an argument or point of view, is instantly shredded. Just so you know.
The solution is easy. Apple should just block these retailers apps from the Store. It wouldn't be an anti-competitive move because the message would be let your customers decide what system they prefer and if you don't let us in your store we will not let you in ours.
Well isn't that interesting. That means chip and pin won't work either. In october 2015 they will become responsible for any fraudulent behavior because of the disabling of Paypass/paywave, because this is chip and pin. The government just implemented that plan. Good luck with there Merchant Exchange system.
Chip+PIN typically uses a slot reader for "full" transactions, including the PIN. Many (all?) of the cards can also be used contactless (i.e. tap-to-pay) but they aren't "full" transactions as far as I know (i.e. if you tap then you don't enter a PIN). It's true that these would no longer work but a standard card-in-the-slot transaction will work fine even without NFC.
I bought it because it fits me. Its is easy, simple, eficient and reliable. Something i can not say about previous phones i owned. On a daily basis i have to take my wallet out about 10 time to pay for stuff. Wether is for work or personal. So trust me i am loving apple pay. Not having to take my wallet out, choose a card, use it (which becomes a pain when the band wears out) answer about 5 question on the key pad, enter pin or sign, put back in my wallet, fit wallet back into pocket vs take phone out and done. So thank you APPLE!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibeam
Dumb. One is not so much more difficult than the other, I see people swiping away at every store without a frown on their face because it is so tedious and tiresome. Get over it! ?Pay is about better security not ease of use.
I dissagree. For the same reason TouchID is wonderful and got a lot of people to use security on there phones who otherwise would not have. Convenience (ease of use).
I personally hate debit and credit machines there a pain in the ass most of the time and take a lot more time to use. Especially when they ask you stupid questions and make you go through pins, do you want money back?, and various other things they have you do. Also waiting for the clerk to respond to your input as well. With ?Pay one finger on your TouchID and your done. No buttons no signing (giving away your personal signature that is stored in the Point of sale system) none of the BS. Not to mention when your magnetic strip starts to fail what a pain in the ass that is. Simple one touch your done.
Calling someone stupid for his opinion is really very rude. His opinion is very very valid. Even Tim Cook demonstrated how simple ?Pay was versus a debit/credit card payment in the Keynote. They had a video showing the comparison.
Apple should produce advertisements about Apple Pay vs. CurrentC how retailers want to data mine your information, and that if you value your privacy you'll shop at Apple Pay aware retailers.
And it should include language in App Store admission rules that retailers that don't allow competing payment systems will be denied access to the App Store. If Google and Apple disallowed CVS from having an app in their stores this nonsense would change.
Chip+PIN typically uses a slot reader for "full" transactions, including the PIN. Many (all?) of the cards can also be used contactless (i.e. tap-to-pay) but they aren't "full" transactions as far as I know (i.e. if you tap then you don't enter a PIN). It's true that these would no longer work but a standard card-in-the-slot transaction will work fine even without NFC.
Ok. I stand corrected, thanks for the clarification, but the contactless payment would seem to be more secure because your not using your pin which in my case with Target and Home Depot was compromised. My bank even told me so. At any rate Rite Aid and CVS are stupid for forcing there customers into "there way" of payment. Its has been my experience that if given an ultimatum most customers will choose the best option (?Pay) and leave the other (MCX) out in the cold.
Good article Daniel, although a little heavy on the 'everyone not in line with Apple is the enemy' mantra. While most companies shouldn't be faulted for not just throwing their products in the trash and saying 'gee lets promote our competitor's product instead' I think CVS and Rite Aid are going to be on the losing end of this one. My guess is they negotiate with Apple and end up with a system where Apple pay will be enabled, but at the same time CVS and Rite Aid will be able to collect and retain the information gathered *at their own stores* and Apple will not play a role in sharing external data.
Will be interesting to watch how these battles play out. This is similar to SoftCard (ISIS) trying to shut down Google wallet, then working with them. I believe SoftCard is also working with Apple so that you'll get both Apple pay and SoftCard on an iPhone. Seems a little moot to me as I think I know which most Apple users will prefer. On the flip side Apple's limitation is that it only works with a subset of consumers, where anyone can use SoftCard or Wallet.
I'm glad the Apple rollout is likely to make all systems more prominent, but I think the real edge Apple has is in the Touch ID.
I'm not sure why I'm getting so much flack for explaining that I need printed receipts for my CPA to do my taxes. I've been using the same firm for twenty years and they save me thousands every year on deductions because they provide an exhaustive, comprehensive, detailed, account of every possible tax advantage I can legally use and it has never been challenged by the IRS, but he requires hard copy of everything in order to make it official.
Your need doesn't undermine that it would be cool to have all your receipts centrally managed. Further, electronic receipts would suffice to prepare taxes. Your issue is unique to your accounting firm. I give my information via PDF, that is scanned via a scanner. A centralized receipt management system would make my life a lot easier. It would be cool to be able to tag them at the point of sale for relevance.
I use Rite-Aid for prescriptions and a few medical supplies only. Actually it's my fathers stuff I'm picking up. Pay by cash or check. Don't particularly shop for daily needs and only occasionally might purchase something other than meds. Never had a receipt with a ton of suggestions or coupons and never been bothered by mailings and never gave my e-mail to places like that when they ask, as I get enough crap already. So Rite Aid is pretty cool in not harassing me and they have little to go on regarding my purchasing needs.
Would I leave Rite Aid because they disable NFC for Apple Pay. No. I shop based on pricing and the distance I have to travel. For people that are anxious to move over to Walgreens, you might want to al least consider this... wouldn't it irritate CVS more if when you make a purchase, try to use your Apple Pay and when they inform you it's not available but they have their own app, just tell them no thanks, leave the items for CVS staff to restock, and then e-mail CVS CEO regarding disappointment in inability to use Apple Pay, so you didn't buy anything and you went over to Walgreens for your purchases because they accept Apple Pay.
No I think losing a current revenue stream in the form of reoccurring prescription sales will hurt more. People go to these stores to get prescriptions and often times pick up other things while they are there. People taking prescriptions else place can be quantified. What you suggest inconveniences me and the cashier, but doesn't send as strong a message to the store. I do think emails to CEOs help.
I live close to all three stores, so a switch is easy. As far as prices go, all three are expensive for add on purchases. You can find deals if you are a a member of a loyalty program, but I find all three stores a hassle.
For you Yanks, I can see that it is a clear improvement over your current method of swiping cards. However, here in Europe, we've had chip and pin for years. It's quick and convenient. Not as quick or convenient as Apple Pay, I'm pretty sure, but not far off.
Therefore, it's not as compelling as it is in America. I'm sure it'll be successful and take off, but it may be slower than in the States.
Ok. I stand corrected, thanks for the clarification, but the contactless payment would seem to be more secure because your not using your pin which in my case with Target and Home Depot was compromised. My bank even told me so. At any rate Rite Aid and CVS are stupid for forcing there customers into "there way" of payment. Its has been my experience that if given an ultimatum most customers will choose the best option (?Pay) and leave the other (MCX) out in the cold.
Well, yes and no. But today, mostly no. Not because of the "no PIN" part but because the cards we're using today don't have chips. So all the info is stored unencrypted and unprotected in the magnetic stripe. And today's PayPass/paywave cards have the same unprotected info available through NFC/RFID to anyone with a reader. That is why I do not use them - the info can be read at a distance of about three feet and then written onto a mag-stripe card, and used in a store (no $20 limit since the card is swiped). Oops.
The same would be true for your debit card (I assume that this was what you were using your PIN with, not a credit card). The data is unprotected in the mag stripe and can easily be cloned. If your PIN is compromised (either a keypad overlay or a pinhole camera) then your bank account is at major risk. Which is why I never EVER use a debit card at stores. The laws about credit cards give you quite a lot of protection against unauthorized use, but protection on debit cards is not as good. As a side note - the WalMart/BestBuy CurrentC system-to-com will have, at best, the same protection as a debit card. It doesn't accept credit cards so those (better) rules do not apply.
So the key issue is not whether the transaction is contactless or not but whether the card info and transaction info is protected. With mag-stripe it is not, either for credit or debit transactions. Some are protected from the POS terminal into the rest of the system but, as we've seen with Target and Home Depot, the data can be grabbed while it's at the POS terminal - unprotected. With chip+PIN and Apple Pay the data is much better protected.
My guess is that CurrentC will get some use but not be well-liked as it's just too clunky. The fact that it requires Internet access at the phone is a problem as cell coverage inside stores is often not so good. But the QR-code/camera thing is going to slow things down a lot. And slow checkout makes for long lines and that leads to unhappy customers.
To me, the very fact that Rite-Aid and CVS have stopped accepting Google Wallet and PayPass/paywave just so they can avoid Apple Pay is a HUGE vote of confidence in Apple Pay.
For you Yanks, I can see that it is a clear improvement over your current method of swiping cards. However, here in Europe, we've had chip and pin for years. It's quick and convenient. Not as quick or convenient as Apple Pay, I'm pretty sure, but not far off.
Therefore, it's not as compelling as it is in America. I'm sure it'll be successful and take off, but it may be slower than in the States.
It's not an option for you at the moment anyway, so it's a bit theoretical, isn't it.
Let's wait and see. Until then, it's pointless speculation on your part.
Funny, I just did the same and made it clear to them why I was doing it. Our family spent a good deal of cash at CVS but will take our business where it is more convenient, more secure and appreciated. Adios CVS.
Inkjet printers are a scam and a great example that human kind has to suffer outdated technology to sustain more profitable models for some companies that happen to control specific markets. (see: electric cars...)
Laser printer technology is cheap enough these days that they should stop making and selling inkjet printers, but since companies are making tons of money from selling inkjet ink cartridges, they keep this obsolete technology alive.
Companies do make tons of money on ink, and if lasers could have replaced inkjet printers, they would have by now, but low cost color lasers suck at photo printing, and that's one of the tasks that people buy the cheap printers for.
Lasers printers are good for documents; that's about it, and if that is all that is required, then a laser printer is a good choice.
Want to save money on ink? Buy a more expensive printer up front for the larger, more economical capacities, or buy refillable cartridges and 3rd party inks. Spend $300 or so on a for a printer and save 50% or more on ink costs forever over the entry level printers, and you'll get a more robust and reliable printer as well.
This coming from a guy whose printer (Epson 7900) costs some $2200 for a complete set of eleven, 700ml pigment ink cartridges, but I also have another, Epson Workforce 4540 that prints duplex and that costs about a hundred for a complete color cartridge set, albeit it isn't classified as a photo printer. Similar products are available from Canon, Lexmark, and HP.
Comments
What a fucking perfect example of a disconnected, ass-backwards, consumer hating decision. I mean, you REALLY need to have your head stuck up so far u your ass to make an executive decision like this.
Let's take a look at this payment process (coming in the future!)
1. Unlock your phone
2. Find the app
3. Launch the app
4. Point your QR code at a scanner, in a very specific position
5. Wait
Oh, and it needs access to your checking account. Yeah, this is gonna take off. Apple Pay has nothing on this. Where the **** do I sign up??
Well said. What an anti customer service payment system! Like Cook said in the keynote, all mobile payment systems have been designed to benefit the companies not the consumer. This is a huge F- You to consumers everywhere that is designed to have you compromise your bank account number with self serving merchants who want to collect data and possibly collect transaction fees directly from you instead of paying the banks. For the sole purpose of lining there pockets.
Remember that computers were going to create a paperless office? Thirty years of personal computing has killed more trees than any invention in the history of man. Ideally we should get both a digital copy of the receipt as well as a small piece of paper, rather than a full sheet 8.5 x 11 for each receipt you need to print out later. Not to mention the hassle of finding an AirPrint printer or emailing to your desktop and paying for the ink and paper.
Also remember that in the US all paper is required by law to be 70% recycled. So not as many trees as you would think. Also remember that trees for paper and lumber are farmed not unlike food and are planted and grown in tree farms and have been for a number of years now. Trees can be a cash crop too.
See: http://weyerhaeuser.com/Businesses/Timberlands ;
and here: http://weyerhaeuser.com/Sustainability/Communities/ForestManagement
as just one example of tree farming by one company. Many others do as well.
Jest? Yes and No. The Apple user demographic is catholic to be sure and contains more than a hint of heroic persistency, never_say_die obstinacy and downright militancy - I've been around long enough to witness examples of all three. I would never bet against Apple and forcing users onto a less secure, more convoluted, freedom busting, cynical data mining hack.......is very likely to be picked up and thrown in their face by a fair proportion of that demographic.
No. It's not about religious fanaticism - it's far more guttural and insinctive.
PS. When I read any of the following...(Apple +) cult(ish), religious, fanatic, fanbois, mindless drones etc...any respect I may have had for an argument or point of view, is instantly shredded. Just so you know.
Well isn't that interesting. That means chip and pin won't work either. In october 2015 they will become responsible for any fraudulent behavior because of the disabling of Paypass/paywave, because this is chip and pin. The government just implemented that plan. Good luck with there Merchant Exchange system.
Chip+PIN typically uses a slot reader for "full" transactions, including the PIN. Many (all?) of the cards can also be used contactless (i.e. tap-to-pay) but they aren't "full" transactions as far as I know (i.e. if you tap then you don't enter a PIN). It's true that these would no longer work but a standard card-in-the-slot transaction will work fine even without NFC.
I bought it because it fits me. Its is easy, simple, eficient and reliable. Something i can not say about previous phones i owned. On a daily basis i have to take my wallet out about 10 time to pay for stuff. Wether is for work or personal. So trust me i am loving apple pay. Not having to take my wallet out, choose a card, use it (which becomes a pain when the band wears out) answer about 5 question on the key pad, enter pin or sign, put back in my wallet, fit wallet back into pocket vs take phone out and done. So thank you APPLE!
Quote:
Dumb. One is not so much more difficult than the other, I see people swiping away at every store without a frown on their face because it is so tedious and tiresome. Get over it! ?Pay is about better security not ease of use.
I dissagree. For the same reason TouchID is wonderful and got a lot of people to use security on there phones who otherwise would not have. Convenience (ease of use).
I personally hate debit and credit machines there a pain in the ass most of the time and take a lot more time to use. Especially when they ask you stupid questions and make you go through pins, do you want money back?, and various other things they have you do. Also waiting for the clerk to respond to your input as well. With ?Pay one finger on your TouchID and your done. No buttons no signing (giving away your personal signature that is stored in the Point of sale system) none of the BS. Not to mention when your magnetic strip starts to fail what a pain in the ass that is. Simple one touch your done.
Calling someone stupid for his opinion is really very rude. His opinion is very very valid. Even Tim Cook demonstrated how simple ?Pay was versus a debit/credit card payment in the Keynote. They had a video showing the comparison.
And it should include language in App Store admission rules that retailers that don't allow competing payment systems will be denied access to the App Store. If Google and Apple disallowed CVS from having an app in their stores this nonsense would change.
Chip+PIN typically uses a slot reader for "full" transactions, including the PIN. Many (all?) of the cards can also be used contactless (i.e. tap-to-pay) but they aren't "full" transactions as far as I know (i.e. if you tap then you don't enter a PIN). It's true that these would no longer work but a standard card-in-the-slot transaction will work fine even without NFC.
Ok. I stand corrected, thanks for the clarification, but the contactless payment would seem to be more secure because your not using your pin which in my case with Target and Home Depot was compromised. My bank even told me so. At any rate Rite Aid and CVS are stupid for forcing there customers into "there way" of payment. Its has been my experience that if given an ultimatum most customers will choose the best option (?Pay) and leave the other (MCX) out in the cold.
Good article Daniel, although a little heavy on the 'everyone not in line with Apple is the enemy' mantra. While most companies shouldn't be faulted for not just throwing their products in the trash and saying 'gee lets promote our competitor's product instead' I think CVS and Rite Aid are going to be on the losing end of this one. My guess is they negotiate with Apple and end up with a system where Apple pay will be enabled, but at the same time CVS and Rite Aid will be able to collect and retain the information gathered *at their own stores* and Apple will not play a role in sharing external data.
Will be interesting to watch how these battles play out. This is similar to SoftCard (ISIS) trying to shut down Google wallet, then working with them. I believe SoftCard is also working with Apple so that you'll get both Apple pay and SoftCard on an iPhone. Seems a little moot to me as I think I know which most Apple users will prefer. On the flip side Apple's limitation is that it only works with a subset of consumers, where anyone can use SoftCard or Wallet.
I'm glad the Apple rollout is likely to make all systems more prominent, but I think the real edge Apple has is in the Touch ID.
Your need doesn't undermine that it would be cool to have all your receipts centrally managed. Further, electronic receipts would suffice to prepare taxes. Your issue is unique to your accounting firm. I give my information via PDF, that is scanned via a scanner. A centralized receipt management system would make my life a lot easier. It would be cool to be able to tag them at the point of sale for relevance.
This is exactly the sort of corporate backbiting that has prevented widespread adoption of electronic payment systems in the past.
Very well. I will never use CurrentC and will try to avoid any other system that tracks my personal information.
No I think losing a current revenue stream in the form of reoccurring prescription sales will hurt more. People go to these stores to get prescriptions and often times pick up other things while they are there. People taking prescriptions else place can be quantified. What you suggest inconveniences me and the cashier, but doesn't send as strong a message to the store. I do think emails to CEOs help.
I live close to all three stores, so a switch is easy. As far as prices go, all three are expensive for add on purchases. You can find deals if you are a a member of a loyalty program, but I find all three stores a hassle.
For you Yanks, I can see that it is a clear improvement over your current method of swiping cards. However, here in Europe, we've had chip and pin for years. It's quick and convenient. Not as quick or convenient as Apple Pay, I'm pretty sure, but not far off.
Therefore, it's not as compelling as it is in America. I'm sure it'll be successful and take off, but it may be slower than in the States.
Ok. I stand corrected, thanks for the clarification, but the contactless payment would seem to be more secure because your not using your pin which in my case with Target and Home Depot was compromised. My bank even told me so. At any rate Rite Aid and CVS are stupid for forcing there customers into "there way" of payment. Its has been my experience that if given an ultimatum most customers will choose the best option (?Pay) and leave the other (MCX) out in the cold.
Well, yes and no. But today, mostly no. Not because of the "no PIN" part but because the cards we're using today don't have chips. So all the info is stored unencrypted and unprotected in the magnetic stripe. And today's PayPass/paywave cards have the same unprotected info available through NFC/RFID to anyone with a reader. That is why I do not use them - the info can be read at a distance of about three feet and then written onto a mag-stripe card, and used in a store (no $20 limit since the card is swiped). Oops.
The same would be true for your debit card (I assume that this was what you were using your PIN with, not a credit card). The data is unprotected in the mag stripe and can easily be cloned. If your PIN is compromised (either a keypad overlay or a pinhole camera) then your bank account is at major risk. Which is why I never EVER use a debit card at stores. The laws about credit cards give you quite a lot of protection against unauthorized use, but protection on debit cards is not as good. As a side note - the WalMart/BestBuy CurrentC system-to-com will have, at best, the same protection as a debit card. It doesn't accept credit cards so those (better) rules do not apply.
So the key issue is not whether the transaction is contactless or not but whether the card info and transaction info is protected. With mag-stripe it is not, either for credit or debit transactions. Some are protected from the POS terminal into the rest of the system but, as we've seen with Target and Home Depot, the data can be grabbed while it's at the POS terminal - unprotected. With chip+PIN and Apple Pay the data is much better protected.
My guess is that CurrentC will get some use but not be well-liked as it's just too clunky. The fact that it requires Internet access at the phone is a problem as cell coverage inside stores is often not so good. But the QR-code/camera thing is going to slow things down a lot. And slow checkout makes for long lines and that leads to unhappy customers.
To me, the very fact that Rite-Aid and CVS have stopped accepting Google Wallet and PayPass/paywave just so they can avoid Apple Pay is a HUGE vote of confidence in Apple Pay.
It's not an option for you at the moment anyway, so it's a bit theoretical, isn't it.
Let's wait and see. Until then, it's pointless speculation on your part.
Sure it might be an easy place to store receipts but you'll just need to print them out later to get your taxes done.
99.9% of consumers don't need retail receipts printed to do their taxes. And if you need it for any reason, just AirPrint it.
Funny, I just did the same and made it clear to them why I was doing it. Our family spent a good deal of cash at CVS but will take our business where it is more convenient, more secure and appreciated. Adios CVS.
Inkjet printers are a scam and a great example that human kind has to suffer outdated technology to sustain more profitable models for some companies that happen to control specific markets. (see: electric cars...)
Laser printer technology is cheap enough these days that they should stop making and selling inkjet printers, but since companies are making tons of money from selling inkjet ink cartridges, they keep this obsolete technology alive.
Companies do make tons of money on ink, and if lasers could have replaced inkjet printers, they would have by now, but low cost color lasers suck at photo printing, and that's one of the tasks that people buy the cheap printers for.
Lasers printers are good for documents; that's about it, and if that is all that is required, then a laser printer is a good choice.
Want to save money on ink? Buy a more expensive printer up front for the larger, more economical capacities, or buy refillable cartridges and 3rd party inks. Spend $300 or so on a for a printer and save 50% or more on ink costs forever over the entry level printers, and you'll get a more robust and reliable printer as well.
This coming from a guy whose printer (Epson 7900) costs some $2200 for a complete set of eleven, 700ml pigment ink cartridges, but I also have another, Epson Workforce 4540 that prints duplex and that costs about a hundred for a complete color cartridge set, albeit it isn't classified as a photo printer. Similar products are available from Canon, Lexmark, and HP.