Apple Pay growth will make it the next antitrust fight with regulators

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    Nonsense. Any credit card can be added to the Wallet. This isn’t a credible line of argumentation.
    All the documentation I've read from Apple Support on Wallet reads like whatever card you add to it, it becomes Apple Pay and Apple gets a cut as a result.

    That is the whole or at least main reason for the investigation as far as I can tell. 
  • Reply 22 of 41
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 




    So, from a privacy and security, standpoint Apple should sink down to lowest common denominator?

    While their at it, why not get rid of the Apple Store and convert to the Open Architecture model -- where anybody can do anything?

    Where is the line drawn?   And, who draws it?
    I have yet to see any conclusive evidence of a security threat from opening the NFC hardware up to other apps. 

    They would still run through Apple's API's. 

    The system would function just like it does on Android phones. Secure enclave, TEE etc. 

    I haven't heard about security problems on those phones either. 

    Using Apple Pay would still be an option. Users would still be able to ignore the alternatives if they wanted to.

    The problem from the investigation perspective is that Apple doesn't allow the alternatives to even exist. 



    You sound like Pfizer:   "There is no evidence that those with allergies are at greater risk from our vaccine".  (Even though they made a point of not looking for evidence).

    Can Apple open a doorway into their walled garden without compromising their bank vault like security and privacy?    Perhaps.   But it seems safer to keep those walls up.

    The world wants Apple to adopt a Windows like open architecture.  It's an easy argument to make.   But that's why security is hard:  it's expensive and a pain in the butt.  And, it's never worth it -- till it would have been.   But then its too late.

    Beats
  • Reply 23 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 




    So, from a privacy and security, standpoint Apple should sink down to lowest common denominator?

    While their at it, why not get rid of the Apple Store and convert to the Open Architecture model -- where anybody can do anything?

    Where is the line drawn?   And, who draws it?
    I have yet to see any conclusive evidence of a security threat from opening the NFC hardware up to other apps. 

    They would still run through Apple's API's. 

    The system would function just like it does on Android phones. Secure enclave, TEE etc. 

    I haven't heard about security problems on those phones either. 

    Using Apple Pay would still be an option. Users would still be able to ignore the alternatives if they wanted to.

    The problem from the investigation perspective is that Apple doesn't allow the alternatives to even exist. 



    You sound like Pfizer:   "There is no evidence that those with allergies are at greater risk from our vaccine".  (Even though they made a point of not looking for evidence).

    Can Apple open a doorway into their walled garden without compromising their bank vault like security and privacy?    Perhaps.   But it seems safer to keep those walls up.

    The world wants Apple to adopt a Windows like open architecture.  It's an easy argument to make.   But that's why security is hard:  it's expensive and a pain in the butt.  And, it's never worth it -- till it would have been.   But then its too late.

    I'll put it another way. There is a whole bunch of technologies that are gateways out of the walled garden. 4/5G, Bluetooth, Wireless. These are necessary for appropriate use of those radios in the real world. NFC is simply another feather in the radio hat.

    I see no reason why Apple could not reserve its use to the Apple ecosystem. That wouldn't be an issue. The 'issue' is that Apple isn't doing that. It is using NFC for activity beyond the walled garden and eliminating any possibility of competition from third parties. It effectively wants to have its cake and eat it.

    No doubt all vendors would like the same and many of course do just that in other areas, but I feel regulators won't see things the same way. That's why there are investigations underway for many of these vendors. 

    AFAIK, Apple has never supported its security argument with a technical presentation even if only to the regulators. 

    In what way is NFC any more insecure than Bluetooth or 4/5G or Bluetooth? 

    Remember, for payments, it isn't Apple that has to worry, it is the bank processing system but they already fully support Android Pay systems so obviously they see absolutely nothing wrong with those implementations. The only thing that worries Apple is having competition for the 0.15% cut. 
  • Reply 24 of 41
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 



    Apple invented iPhone. They don't owe any "Pay" copycat anything!
  • Reply 25 of 41
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    So Visa, my bank card and gift cards are not an option?
  • Reply 26 of 41
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 




    So, from a privacy and security, standpoint Apple should sink down to lowest common denominator?

    While their at it, why not get rid of the Apple Store and convert to the Open Architecture model -- where anybody can do anything?

    Where is the line drawn?   And, who draws it?
    I have yet to see any conclusive evidence of a security threat from opening the NFC hardware up to other apps. 

    They would still run through Apple's API's. 

    The system would function just like it does on Android phones. Secure enclave, TEE etc. 

    I haven't heard about security problems on those phones either. 

    Using Apple Pay would still be an option. Users would still be able to ignore the alternatives if they wanted to.

    The problem from the investigation perspective is that Apple doesn't allow the alternatives to even exist. 



    You sound like Pfizer:   "There is no evidence that those with allergies are at greater risk from our vaccine".  (Even though they made a point of not looking for evidence).

    Can Apple open a doorway into their walled garden without compromising their bank vault like security and privacy?    Perhaps.   But it seems safer to keep those walls up.

    The world wants Apple to adopt a Windows like open architecture.  It's an easy argument to make.   But that's why security is hard:  it's expensive and a pain in the butt.  And, it's never worth it -- till it would have been.   But then its too late.

    I'll put it another way. There is a whole bunch of technologies that are gateways out of the walled garden. 4/5G, Bluetooth, Wireless. These are necessary for appropriate use of those radios in the real world. NFC is simply another feather in the radio hat.

    I see no reason why Apple could not reserve its use to the Apple ecosystem. That wouldn't be an issue. The 'issue' is that Apple isn't doing that. It is using NFC for activity beyond the walled garden and eliminating any possibility of competition from third parties. It effectively wants to have its cake and eat it.

    No doubt all vendors would like the same and many of course do just that in other areas, but I feel regulators won't see things the same way. That's why there are investigations underway for many of these vendors. 

    AFAIK, Apple has never supported its security argument with a technical presentation even if only to the regulators. 

    In what way is NFC any more insecure than Bluetooth or 4/5G or Bluetooth? 

    Remember, for payments, it isn't Apple that has to worry, it is the bank processing system but they already fully support Android Pay systems so obviously they see absolutely nothing wrong with those implementations. The only thing that worries Apple is having competition for the 0.15% cut. 

    You are equating NFC -- used for highly secure (mostly financial) transactions over outside networks -- to bluetooth and WiFi?   Technically you are correct.  But I want my financial transactions to be as secure as Apple can make them.   It's why I use Apple Pay almost exclusively.

    You are correct that NFC is no more secure than Bluetooth or LTE.   But that is what Apple's walled garden does:   it adds restrictions to how it is used and accessed to increase the security and privacy over that of other, more public communication technologies.
  • Reply 27 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 




    So, from a privacy and security, standpoint Apple should sink down to lowest common denominator?

    While their at it, why not get rid of the Apple Store and convert to the Open Architecture model -- where anybody can do anything?

    Where is the line drawn?   And, who draws it?
    I have yet to see any conclusive evidence of a security threat from opening the NFC hardware up to other apps. 

    They would still run through Apple's API's. 

    The system would function just like it does on Android phones. Secure enclave, TEE etc. 

    I haven't heard about security problems on those phones either. 

    Using Apple Pay would still be an option. Users would still be able to ignore the alternatives if they wanted to.

    The problem from the investigation perspective is that Apple doesn't allow the alternatives to even exist. 



    You sound like Pfizer:   "There is no evidence that those with allergies are at greater risk from our vaccine".  (Even though they made a point of not looking for evidence).

    Can Apple open a doorway into their walled garden without compromising their bank vault like security and privacy?    Perhaps.   But it seems safer to keep those walls up.

    The world wants Apple to adopt a Windows like open architecture.  It's an easy argument to make.   But that's why security is hard:  it's expensive and a pain in the butt.  And, it's never worth it -- till it would have been.   But then its too late.

    I'll put it another way. There is a whole bunch of technologies that are gateways out of the walled garden. 4/5G, Bluetooth, Wireless. These are necessary for appropriate use of those radios in the real world. NFC is simply another feather in the radio hat.

    I see no reason why Apple could not reserve its use to the Apple ecosystem. That wouldn't be an issue. The 'issue' is that Apple isn't doing that. It is using NFC for activity beyond the walled garden and eliminating any possibility of competition from third parties. It effectively wants to have its cake and eat it.

    No doubt all vendors would like the same and many of course do just that in other areas, but I feel regulators won't see things the same way. That's why there are investigations underway for many of these vendors. 

    AFAIK, Apple has never supported its security argument with a technical presentation even if only to the regulators. 

    In what way is NFC any more insecure than Bluetooth or 4/5G or Bluetooth? 

    Remember, for payments, it isn't Apple that has to worry, it is the bank processing system but they already fully support Android Pay systems so obviously they see absolutely nothing wrong with those implementations. The only thing that worries Apple is having competition for the 0.15% cut. 

    You are equating NFC -- used for highly secure (mostly financial) transactions over outside networks -- to bluetooth and WiFi?   Technically you are correct.  But I want my financial transactions to be as secure as Apple can make them.   It's why I use Apple Pay almost exclusively.

    You are correct that NFC is no more secure than Bluetooth or LTE.   But that is what Apple's walled garden does:   it adds restrictions to how it is used and accessed to increase the security and privacy over that of other, more public communication technologies.
    I'm not equating the technologies for their specific use cases but using them as examples to why security isn't the issue and they necessarily branch out from the walled garden.

    However, clearly the 'near' in NFC leans well from a security standpoint for all phones that have it (independently of platform). 

    As I mentioned, I haven't heard Apple actually explain the 'security' side to the argument.

    That isn't really all that relevant for Apple as it is the banks and payment processors that would have far more to lose if things weren't considered secure. As they have already accepted NFC on Android systems, clearly security is considered more than good enough. 
  • Reply 28 of 41
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 




    So, from a privacy and security, standpoint Apple should sink down to lowest common denominator?

    While their at it, why not get rid of the Apple Store and convert to the Open Architecture model -- where anybody can do anything?

    Where is the line drawn?   And, who draws it?
    I have yet to see any conclusive evidence of a security threat from opening the NFC hardware up to other apps. 

    They would still run through Apple's API's. 

    The system would function just like it does on Android phones. Secure enclave, TEE etc. 

    I haven't heard about security problems on those phones either. 

    Using Apple Pay would still be an option. Users would still be able to ignore the alternatives if they wanted to.

    The problem from the investigation perspective is that Apple doesn't allow the alternatives to even exist. 



    You sound like Pfizer:   "There is no evidence that those with allergies are at greater risk from our vaccine".  (Even though they made a point of not looking for evidence).

    Can Apple open a doorway into their walled garden without compromising their bank vault like security and privacy?    Perhaps.   But it seems safer to keep those walls up.

    The world wants Apple to adopt a Windows like open architecture.  It's an easy argument to make.   But that's why security is hard:  it's expensive and a pain in the butt.  And, it's never worth it -- till it would have been.   But then its too late.

    I'll put it another way. There is a whole bunch of technologies that are gateways out of the walled garden. 4/5G, Bluetooth, Wireless. These are necessary for appropriate use of those radios in the real world. NFC is simply another feather in the radio hat.

    I see no reason why Apple could not reserve its use to the Apple ecosystem. That wouldn't be an issue. The 'issue' is that Apple isn't doing that. It is using NFC for activity beyond the walled garden and eliminating any possibility of competition from third parties. It effectively wants to have its cake and eat it.

    No doubt all vendors would like the same and many of course do just that in other areas, but I feel regulators won't see things the same way. That's why there are investigations underway for many of these vendors. 

    AFAIK, Apple has never supported its security argument with a technical presentation even if only to the regulators. 

    In what way is NFC any more insecure than Bluetooth or 4/5G or Bluetooth? 

    Remember, for payments, it isn't Apple that has to worry, it is the bank processing system but they already fully support Android Pay systems so obviously they see absolutely nothing wrong with those implementations. The only thing that worries Apple is having competition for the 0.15% cut. 

    You are equating NFC -- used for highly secure (mostly financial) transactions over outside networks -- to bluetooth and WiFi?   Technically you are correct.  But I want my financial transactions to be as secure as Apple can make them.   It's why I use Apple Pay almost exclusively.

    You are correct that NFC is no more secure than Bluetooth or LTE.   But that is what Apple's walled garden does:   it adds restrictions to how it is used and accessed to increase the security and privacy over that of other, more public communication technologies.. 

    As I mentioned, I haven't heard Apple actually explain the 'security' side to the argument.

    If you haven't, then please move along. It appears ApplePay is not for you. 

    You show up and make the same point again and again - and again - every time there is an ApplePay-related story on AI. It's getting tiresome (and if the past is any guide, I expect you to bring up your spouse next). 
  • Reply 29 of 41
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    A bunch of grifters...
  • Reply 30 of 41
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
  • Reply 31 of 41
    crowley said:
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
    That's a pretty low bar to set. 

    And something tells me it may have had something to do with a country that the European elites love to roll their eyes at...
  • Reply 32 of 41
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    crowley said:
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
    That's a pretty low bar to set. 

    And something tells me it may have had something to do with a country that the European elites love to roll their eyes at...

    Peace --- the absence of war -- is a "low bar"?    Really?

    But, it goes even beyond peace to mutual support and mutual growth.   The Brexiters are finding that out:   They thought they could retain all the benefits of being part of the EU without being part of it and setting their own self enriching policies -- essentially they thought they could have their cake and eat it too.   They are now just a bunch of unhappy school children in denial that the grown ups told them to grow up and act their age -- their next stage will be temper tantrums and then pouting.
  • Reply 33 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.


    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 




    So, from a privacy and security, standpoint Apple should sink down to lowest common denominator?

    While their at it, why not get rid of the Apple Store and convert to the Open Architecture model -- where anybody can do anything?

    Where is the line drawn?   And, who draws it?
    I have yet to see any conclusive evidence of a security threat from opening the NFC hardware up to other apps. 

    They would still run through Apple's API's. 

    The system would function just like it does on Android phones. Secure enclave, TEE etc. 

    I haven't heard about security problems on those phones either. 

    Using Apple Pay would still be an option. Users would still be able to ignore the alternatives if they wanted to.

    The problem from the investigation perspective is that Apple doesn't allow the alternatives to even exist. 



    You sound like Pfizer:   "There is no evidence that those with allergies are at greater risk from our vaccine".  (Even though they made a point of not looking for evidence).

    Can Apple open a doorway into their walled garden without compromising their bank vault like security and privacy?    Perhaps.   But it seems safer to keep those walls up.

    The world wants Apple to adopt a Windows like open architecture.  It's an easy argument to make.   But that's why security is hard:  it's expensive and a pain in the butt.  And, it's never worth it -- till it would have been.   But then its too late.

    I'll put it another way. There is a whole bunch of technologies that are gateways out of the walled garden. 4/5G, Bluetooth, Wireless. These are necessary for appropriate use of those radios in the real world. NFC is simply another feather in the radio hat.

    I see no reason why Apple could not reserve its use to the Apple ecosystem. That wouldn't be an issue. The 'issue' is that Apple isn't doing that. It is using NFC for activity beyond the walled garden and eliminating any possibility of competition from third parties. It effectively wants to have its cake and eat it.

    No doubt all vendors would like the same and many of course do just that in other areas, but I feel regulators won't see things the same way. That's why there are investigations underway for many of these vendors. 

    AFAIK, Apple has never supported its security argument with a technical presentation even if only to the regulators. 

    In what way is NFC any more insecure than Bluetooth or 4/5G or Bluetooth? 

    Remember, for payments, it isn't Apple that has to worry, it is the bank processing system but they already fully support Android Pay systems so obviously they see absolutely nothing wrong with those implementations. The only thing that worries Apple is having competition for the 0.15% cut. 

    You are equating NFC -- used for highly secure (mostly financial) transactions over outside networks -- to bluetooth and WiFi?   Technically you are correct.  But I want my financial transactions to be as secure as Apple can make them.   It's why I use Apple Pay almost exclusively.

    You are correct that NFC is no more secure than Bluetooth or LTE.   But that is what Apple's walled garden does:   it adds restrictions to how it is used and accessed to increase the security and privacy over that of other, more public communication technologies.. 

    As I mentioned, I haven't heard Apple actually explain the 'security' side to the argument.

    If you haven't, then please move along. It appears ApplePay is not for you. 

    You show up and make the same point again and again - and again - every time there is an ApplePay-related story on AI. It's getting tiresome (and if the past is any guide, I expect you to bring up your spouse next). 
    I have moved along. I don't own an iPhone now. I'm happy not to have one. I have more choice without one. The experience is better without one. Demonstrably so. 

    I suggest you read what comes before my posts because they are replying to other statements. 

    What is tiring is having to counter those posts which clearly miss the whole point of why Apple is being investigated. And I don't even take issue with all if them. I normally pick one.

    Being a discussion forum the whole point is to discuss. If someone says Apple doesn't have a monopoly on its NFC or Apple Pay isn't your only contactless option on an iPhone, I will sometimes chime in with a counterpoint for the benefit of readers who are interested in a different viewpoint. 

    Surely, it must be more tiresome reading all the posts that clearly miss the whole point of these investigations. Especially as for every 10 posts I let 9 go by unchallenged. 
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 34 of 41
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    crowley said:
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
    That's a pretty low bar to set. 
    Apparently I think of generations of peace as being a much bigger deal than you do.
    avon b7GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 35 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    crowley said:
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
    That's a pretty low bar to set. 

    And something tells me it may have had something to do with a country that the European elites love to roll their eyes at...

    Peace --- the absence of war -- is a "low bar"?    Really?

    But, it goes even beyond peace to mutual support and mutual growth.   The Brexiters are finding that out:   They thought they could retain all the benefits of being part of the EU without being part of it and setting their own self enriching policies -- essentially they thought they could have their cake and eat it too.   They are now just a bunch of unhappy school children in denial that the grown ups told them to grow up and act their age -- their next stage will be temper tantrums and then pouting.
    Yes. Exactly.

    Peace is something newer generations can thankfully take for granted but we should never forget how we pulled it off. 

    And even in the absence of conflict there are other things we also take for granted. Universal health care. Consumer protections. Food protections. It is amazing how far we have come.

    My father-in-law spoke of hunger in Spain. Eating a chicken was reserved for celebrations. Having a fridge was a luxury. Military service was obligatory. 

    I was born in London and had an outside toilet. Four coal fires in the house. Piped gas reached my house about 40 years ago. 

    Progress has been made because peace and stability have allowed the collective to not only benefit but prosper. Spain is consistently listed as one of the best countries to live in.

    The EU is far from perfect but its success is undeniable. I am pro European and polls consistently show that most people are also happy living within the EU. There are ups and downs in any situation but the EU has been been a resounding success on many levels. 

    The UK was told the day after the referendum result (a referendum UK law prevented me - and a million more from voting in) that you can't be better off out than in.

    The UK is finally coming round to seeing what that means. 
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 36 of 41
    crowley said:
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
    That's a pretty low bar to set. 

    And something tells me it may have had something to do with a country that the European elites love to roll their eyes at...

    Peace --- the absence of war -- is a "low bar"?    Really?

    But, it goes even beyond peace to mutual support and mutual growth.   The Brexiters are finding that out:   They thought they could retain all the benefits of being part of the EU without being part of it and setting their own self enriching policies -- essentially they thought they could have their cake and eat it too.   They are now just a bunch of unhappy school children in denial that the grown ups told them to grow up and act their age -- their next stage will be temper tantrums and then pouting.
    You missed the point my post: there's been a few generations of peace because of substantial help and looking-over-the-shoulder from the US (e.g., Marshall Plan, NATO, weakening of the former Soviet Union, helping to liberate the East Bloc, etc). More ominously, the conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo could have turned really horrendous for Europe -- frozen in inaction, continuing to let it fester -- were it not for the US intervention that thwarted it.

    The formation of the EU helped as well, although there have been some prior -- including some forced -- attempts at economic "integration" in history that have failed.
  • Reply 37 of 41
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    crowley said:
    Wow, the EU again. God bless the EU parliament, may they endeavor to someday do something useful & constructive...
    The longest period of peace between the major European powers in about a thousand years.  You're welcome.
    That's a pretty low bar to set. 

    And something tells me it may have had something to do with a country that the European elites love to roll their eyes at...

    Peace --- the absence of war -- is a "low bar"?    Really?

    But, it goes even beyond peace to mutual support and mutual growth.   The Brexiters are finding that out:   They thought they could retain all the benefits of being part of the EU without being part of it and setting their own self enriching policies -- essentially they thought they could have their cake and eat it too.   They are now just a bunch of unhappy school children in denial that the grown ups told them to grow up and act their age -- their next stage will be temper tantrums and then pouting.
    You missed the point my post: there's been a few generations of peace because of substantial help and looking-over-the-shoulder from the US (e.g., Marshall Plan, NATO, weakening of the former Soviet Union, helping to liberate the East Bloc, etc). More ominously, the conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo could have turned really horrendous for Europe -- frozen in inaction, continuing to let it fester -- were it not for the US intervention that thwarted it.

    The formation of the EU helped as well, although there have been some prior -- including some forced -- attempts at economic "integration" in history that have failed.

    Yeh, that's all true....   The Pax Americana....

    But we can't continue playing the world's policemen forever...    One of the reasons China (and others) have done so well is they don't sink 3/4's of Trillion $ a year into weapons of war that contribute nothing to a nation.  It's like paying somebody to dig a hole and fill it again.   Among a host of weapons, we have 11 Aircraft Craft Carrier Groups that EACH cost $6.5 million per day to operate (plus the hundreds of billions for the ships and planes) -- and not one of them actually protect the U.S.   We can say they are protecting other nations (and they are) but really, they're there to dominate and intimidate.   Meanwhile, China (and others) sinks that money into industry and infrastructure and laughs all the way to the bank.

    Rome and Britain got away with it but only because they extracted taxes and such from the lands they conquered.   But we get none of that.   We just get the bills to pay.
  • Reply 38 of 41
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.

    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 
    How about eating Big Macs and Quarter-pounders (and other McDonald's offerings) is the only way to eat within a McDonald's building. Why can't I order Burger King options? Or my favorite sushi vendor?

    McDonald's is reserving the slice of the pie to themselves! They aren't allowing competition in this area! 

    ...or something.
  • Reply 39 of 41
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,624member
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.

    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 
    How about eating Big Macs and Quarter-pounders (and other McDonald's offerings) is the only way to eat within a McDonald's building. Why can't I order Burger King options? Or my favorite sushi vendor?

    McDonald's is reserving the slice of the pie to themselves! They aren't allowing competition in this area! 

    ...or something.
    Completely different situations. Firstly restaurants can reserve the right of admission. Also if there were any kind of restriction on activities within the restaurant it would probably be clearly marked with relevant signage. Of course, another vital point is that there is no kind of 'lock in' at restaurants. 

    To point out US law, some states actually ban retailers from NOT accepting cash. That means a universal payment method is available. And even if a restaurant were to ban cash it would probably accept other options. Multiple options. Any limitation in that regard would probably be considered a form of discrimination and I believe that those states who have made it obligatory to accept cash payments when it is proferred, did so using discrimination as one of the reasons. 

    However, that is all irrelevant here. I've stated on multiple occasions that Apple Pay,  even as it stands, might be OK but I think that in that particular case, Apple would be required to make it known to customers at time of purchase (along with all other activities that curtail competition). 
  • Reply 40 of 41
    avon b7 said:
    chaicka said:
    Unfair and Biased.

    What about Google Pay on Android phones and Samsung Pay on Samsung phones?

    Just because they ain’t as big as Apple Pay?

    Regulatory are no longer about regulating but more of a political machine and monetary generating machine.
    This isn't about Apple Pay per se. 

    This is about Apple Pay being the only route to make phone based payments with on an iPhone's NFC hardware. 

    It's a completely different issue.

    Samsung Pay, Huawei Pay, Google Pay, BBVA Pay etc are not the only options on the phones where they offered.

    That means the 0.15% slice of the pie Apple is taking is reserved for itself, as 'competition' in this area doesn't exist on iPhones. 

    We'll see what the different investigations conclude in regards to the situation. 
    How about eating Big Macs and Quarter-pounders (and other McDonald's offerings) is the only way to eat within a McDonald's building. Why can't I order Burger King options? Or my favorite sushi vendor?

    McDonald's is reserving the slice of the pie to themselves! They aren't allowing competition in this area! 

    ...or something.

    Why not?   For one thing the waiter would probably spit in the food that you DID order!
Sign In or Register to comment.