I doubt we will see this anytime soon.. not with Visa and MasterCard adding additional service fees to eWallets such as Googles and PayPals.
I just checked with Paypal. They claim 110 million active accounts. I don't think you realize how much pull Apple will have based on their customer base alone.
I've been arguing the potential of this for a couple years now. No idea if they will do it but it seems to me they'l want to expand their Passbook service. I have about a dozen ideas to make this work but I'll save it for when the discussion calls for it.
It won't get to there. Most companies will say no to having to give Apple a cut
MasterCard has acknowledged that it needs Apple to bring NFC payments into the mainstream. That's could be a way for Apple to meet them (and Visa and PayPal) half-way. They wouldn't need a cut the same way other vendors get a cut; a fraction of a percent would be more than enough to ensure they "break even" which seems to be something they like to do with their iTunes Store sales.
The only problem with saying all the iTunes accounts with credit cards will help Apple, is that all those people by definition already have a credit card, which is already very easy to use. It seems more likely that credit card companies will get together with retailers to add thumbprint readers (or something) to their cash registers, and just leave phone makers out of the loop.
The big question then becomes why haven't they bothered to yet? There are other security measures bounced around, like having your picture stored at Visa and when your card is swiped it pops up on the terminal. That simple idea would eliminate CC fraud as there's no way card duplicators could change your picture on file.
and why do CC companies allow Moneris and all the other payment processors to have terminals in stores? Why didn't they get together and make their own terminals and cut out the processor (middle man)?
So, bottom line. I've said the main article's hypothesis for years.
The battle that Apple is fighting is becoming the payment system for the upper quartile of the global consumer population... which accounts for most of the world's wealth. If you can eliminate plastic in your wallet for a single set of accounts that are all paid for by your AppleID registered CC, insured that only your phone and password, along your fingerprints/voiceprint, and all those 'membership cards' (store, starbucks, airline), are just apps in your phone, you'll be happy.
Passbook is a first phase, and hardly the end game. The end game will be an apple 'credit card' app, and inapp-purchases that integrate into Apple's Identification API (biometrics, risk analytics, and passing of 'certificates/coupons/tickets' to a 'display app.'
The big question then becomes why haven't they bothered to yet? There are other security measures bounced around, like having your picture stored at Visa and when your card is swiped it pops up on the terminal. That simple idea would eliminate CC fraud as there's no way card duplicators could change your picture on file.
and why do CC companies allow Moneris and all the other payment processors to have terminals in stores? Why didn't they get together and make their own terminals and cut out the processor (middle man)?
Is that really good enough security? Pictures can look very different with a hair change. And what about those that look similar to each other (many people using fake IDs are actually using a real ID of an older friend of family member).
On top of that, how do change the picture stored by the CC company? If you need to send it in can't someone who is committing fraud alter it if they know enough personal info? And how much will this slow down a retailer if they have to wait for an image to load for verification? What will be the cost for the new HW that has a display for a face comparison?
I think that's all too much effort. I'd rather just have a secure PIN and a "card" I can track and/or erase at will. This means NFC so one can't even use my "card" unless they have access into my phone and then the payment PIN on top of that. If I lose my phone I can secure erase it which is better than with a plastic credit card which I can only call and have canceled.
The big question then becomes why haven't they bothered to yet? There are other security measures bounced around, like having your picture stored at Visa and when your card is swiped it pops up on the terminal. That simple idea would eliminate CC fraud as there's no way card duplicators could change your picture on file.
and why do CC companies allow Moneris and all the other payment processors to have terminals in stores? Why didn't they get together and make their own terminals and cut out the processor (middle man)?
because it's a tiered system. Banks get Visa/Mastercard to front these short term credit instruments, and the cards organizations don't want to connect to millions of storefronts, in different risk strata, different countries, different banking rules, different consumer protection rules. Note that the credit card is not owned by VISA/MC/AMEX... or you... it's owned by a Bank! So you have Bank. CC. Merchant network (Card Payment system). Merchant. Buyer.
But... that was before the Internet. Look at Square and Intuit.
Now... look at your smartphone... look at a PoS device. Have one generate an invoice, the other read the invoice and assure payment... both meet 'immediately' in the cloud. That's ITMS... Why scan a CC when you can 'pass' a CC#(and a 1 time verifier), and you can then passback an approval from your 'paying institution' (Apple).
Like I said. Some day Apple will be it's own bank/credit card company... which you pay with one of your other credit cards, or an ACH... or... your Apple Bank account.
The key for passbook is to get high value vendors on board, since they have more r&d money to experiment on potential cash flow/customer service improvements.
Son of passbook will be an API driven financial authentication, approval and payment system that can be driven into any app
Apple should make a hardware dongle that they give away for free to any retailer that wants one. It connects to the authorization networks via Ethernet, Bluetooth, WiFi, or traditional phone line. Looks like an Apple TV, but a quarter of the size. Has an NFC transceiver, connects directly to iTunes. A merchant can set it up with their iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.
It will evolve. I actually find it quite useful. Target - Mobile coupons. Dunkin Donuts (Gift Cards), Walgreens are all official apps. Valpak and Coupons also are apps that feed in. Lemon Wallet is a great app, lets you add nearly any card to Passbook. I have added my Dental and Health ID cars, Best Buy Rewards Zone card. Could also add my Credit Cards and Drivers License if I wanted to.
That doesn't include the airlines. I only fly Southwest, and they have yet to add Passbook to their stable, but I am sure it will come.
I agree, it isn't 100% as "Apple simple" as other apps, but I have found it increasingly useful. I also like that, because of the way we have our iCloud set up, I can add a coupon to it from work and my wife, at the store, has access to it instantly.
I'm curios to know how you've added your dental and health cards to Passbook? This type of use would seem very handy.
Is that really good enough security? Pictures can look very different with a hair change. And what about those that look similar to each other (many people using fake IDs are actually using a real ID of an older friend of family member).
On top of that, how do change the picture stored by the CC company? If you need to send it in can't someone who is committing fraud alter it if they know enough personal info? And how much will this slow down a retailer if they have to wait for an image to load for verification? What will be the cost for the new HW that has a display for a face comparison?
I think that's all too much effort. I'd rather just have a secure PIN and a "card" I can track and/or erase at will. This means NFC so one can't even use my "card" unless they have access into my phone and then the payment PIN on top of that. If I lose my phone I can secure erase it which is better than with a plastic credit card which I can only call and have canceled.
There is some merit to the CC picture. That is why the debit cards now have your picture on it. The fact is that in order to apply for a debit card you usually have to visit the bank where they take your picture. CC are done through the mail/Internet/phone but they could conceivably partner with your bank and get the same photo from them if the user requests. I always appreciate when the cashier asks for a drivers license to verify. At the grocery store they have never asked so I would suspect they get a lot of people with stolen credit cards in there as you can rack up a pretty big bill with some high priced food and consumable goods.
I'm curios to know how you've added your dental and health cards to Passbook? This type of use would seem very handy.
I'm curious how you can use it conveniently though. At my health care they swipe the card so if the card has to be manually typed in by the desk personnel how is that more efficient? You hold up the line of patients for the sake of lightening your wallet by a couple grams. Same thing for drivers license and auto insurance card. If you get pulled over you are just going to anger the cop not having the real license... and you know it is not so smart to anger a cop who has pulled you over.
While some recent rumors have suggested an e-wallet could be tied to fingerprint scanning functionality in this year's so-called "iPhone 5S," he suggested such a feature may not be likely to materialize until 2014.
Agree. That would be too big a change for the usual "S-for-Speed" model year.
I'm on the even year track anyway, since I got my iPhone 5 last September.
And boy would I like that feature. Getting sick of typing out passwords / passcodes.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
But the key factor for Apple is iTunes: As of January, the company had more than a half-billion active iTunes accounts linked to credit cards.
Ya don't say.
Just wait until Wall Street hears about those "half-billion active iTunes accounts":
"Apple Falls Woefully Short of 1 Billion Customer Mark"
"We believe that Apple was never fully committed to mobile advertising as a product, and as a result Apple has not been as big a player in mobile ads as many expected when they announced," he said.
I believe iAd was targeted at TV from the start.
Apple is probably demo-ing iAds on prototypes of their future-TV 4K hardware right now.
Kiss the "commercial break" as we know it goodbye. iAds could be interactive, more
engaging, and most importantly, might require clicking through instead of blindly
fast-forwarding. If Apple really wants to, they will force us to interact with iAds in order
to continue viewing the show. Guaranteed attention to each and every iAd.
Yes, iAd will eventually be critical to Apple's mobile devices (possibly subsidizing them)
and of course to their TV solution (which may not be rolled out until 4K content and TVs become common).
But no, iAd isn't essential to Apple's success now. Just there as a Google ad-blocker in case Apple needs it.
Apple is probably demo-ing iAds on prototypes of their future-TV 4K hardware right now.
With 4K we will finally be able to read the fine print at the bottom of the automobile and home refinance commercials. Other than that I don't see 4K as a huge necessity except for major cinematic productions or sports slow motion replays. For your average sitcom or news broadcast 1080 already reveals plenty of detail on average sized TVs. I'm not sure how popular giant TVs are going to be in the future as typical family rooms are not growing proportionately to the rate of increase of available TV sizes. I know I certainly don't have anywhere to put an 80" TV.
If Apple is waiting for widespread 4K adoption before they release a TV, I think they will be waiting several more years.
1) The number of humans that have lived since the dawn of man falls far below 99 billion.
2) McDonalds has surely served more people than Apple considering the entry cost for a McDonald's product compared to Apple but Apple has CC numbers on file. We're not talking transactions, but actual cards with addresses, names, and security codes manually added by each of those half billion people so they can buy things from Apple. Only Amazon can be compared to Apple in this sense.
edit: Oops! I completely missed the point of your post. That's a huge lack of reading comprehension on my part. It's amazing how intelligence can drop so quickly when you are sick.
Is that really good enough security? Pictures can look very different with a hair change. And what about those that look similar to each other (many people using fake IDs are actually using a real ID of an older friend of family member).
On top of that, how do change the picture stored by the CC company? If you need to send it in can't someone who is committing fraud alter it if they know enough personal info? And how much will this slow down a retailer if they have to wait for an image to load for verification? What will be the cost for the new HW that has a display for a face comparison?
They do it how drivers licenses are done here. You get your picture taken in the driver license office and it's stored on their computer. Sayyou lose your license and go down to get a new one. They have your old picture on file (along with you having to provide ID).
Banks who issue credit cards will do the same thing - take your picture when you open an account or get issued a CC. Pictures aren't "sent in".
The reason poeple can use fake ID is because the ID already has a picture and they can find someone "cloe enough" in looks to use it. If they don't have a copy of your picture to study, then how can they find someone who looks the same to commit the fraud?
Your point about the cost to implement the system is valid, and I suspect the CC companies are happy paying their current costs in fraud vs updating the system and upsetting customers with increased security/less ease of use of paying with a CC. I think this is why we haven't seen any major advances in security. Most merchants are already connected with internet so the time to send an image in minimal (it can be sent as soon as the card is swiped).
Apple doesn't sign up businesses. They put the tools out there and let folks pick to use them or not.
I feel your pain. I don't see any reason why my local grocery cards, my library card etc can't be in passbook, but that's their call, not Apples
Then perhaps Apple needs to change it's approach and begin actively trying to sway business to use/and or see the value of the Passbook app.. In my experience with family/friends, Passbook's purpose is not very well understood.
Humm, how about Passbook businesses using the service in Europe. Other than one airline that is linked to Passbook, it is practically a non existant icon on my i Phone 5. When will that change.?
It's a fair question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Why do you think this is Apple's question to answer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's like asking "I ask you then, why is there a language called HTML? I don't have access to this Inter-Net," in 1994.
No, it isn't. There's no 'signing up'. It's on the businesses themselves to build compatibility into their apps and websites. Apple has already done all the work they have to do. You cannot pin this on them.
It's like blaming the owner of a patent (who has opened it for free licensing) for people not adopting said patent. That's insane. He has already done all of the work.
And a third time: This. Is. Not. Apple's. Responsibility. The app has been executed well; that's not what you're talking about earlier. It has a feature set and it excels at what it does. People claiming it has (or should have) a different feature set may do that all they wish. What they may not do is BLAME Apple for NOT having that feature set.
But again, that's a different argument. Yours is that it's somehow Apple's responsibility to force companies to use it. But it's really on THEM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
Passbook is great, and I do wish more companies would utilize it. However, I also agree with TS above, that isn't Apple's responsibility. They provide developer tools and an app store, but if a business doesn't design and code an app, that isn't Apple's fault; same deal with Passbook. They provided the tools but it isn't their responsibility to 'sign businesses up.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
No, it's an example of your lack of proper understanding of the situation.
Apples approach on this is universal. They put the tool out there but it's up to each company to use it. Or as the old saying goes, they have led the horses to the water, but the horse has to choose to drink
I'm a bit dumbfounded by the "flawgic" in response to a fair question. Didn't some of you belittle Google for the lack of apps on Android? Isn't it natural for any company developing a platform to invite, entice 3rd parties to use it? Even Apple shouldn't rely alone on "build it and they will come?"
Sure, the development part may be done, but to not proactively and very actively promote the use of Passbook makes no sense (and I believe they are doing it). Although I don't think many consumers purchased the iPhone for Passbook alone, it is part of the ecosystem that Apple markets. It's hyperbolic to talk about "forcing" 3rd parties to use it, and merely a tool to mock the OP (and to what end?). Companies are the contents of Passbook. Actively "signing up" companies for Passbook is equivalent to making more music, movies and TV shows available for iTunes (with the difference that there is no revenue stream from Passbook).
Furthermore, Apple's approach is not geographically universal. They put more effort into marketing (to consumers and partners) in the US than anywhere else. They are starting to make China a priority but there is hardly parity from the point of view of contents. Having said that, I'd also argue Apple does a superior job outside of the US in comparison to Amazon and Google. So, it seems the norm for American companies to believe that US-based contents alone deserve significant investment of effort.
Apple's approach is also not universal from a non-geographic perspective. They have abandoned some initiatives before. So it is fair for someone to ask "what's up with Passbook," without being piled on as if he asked a dumb question. In this instance, it is the answers and not the question that are ill posed.
Didn't some of you belittle Google for the lack of apps on Android?
"Not I," said the cat. It's not Google's fault. They've done everything they need to do to get apps made; that they're not made (if they're not made) is the work of the developer.
The only argument in this regard that can be made is to the quality of the platform for which the [whatever] is developed, but that wasn't his complaint.
I'm a bit dumbfounded by the "flawgic" in response to a fair question. Didn't some of you belittle Google for the lack of apps on Android? Isn't it natural for any company developing a platform to invite, entice 3rd parties to use it? Even Apple shouldn't rely alone on "build it and they will come?"
I would agree with Passbook being a lot like Android's (and other OSes) development platform. They built something that doesn't appear to be completely thought out and now they expect 3rd-parties to figure out how it can be useful. Apple didn't do that with Xcode for iOS or the App Store which is why I think Apple's 3rd-party app platform is so successful.
That said, I do use Passbook nearly every day but it's certainly not evolved as quickly as I'd like it to on any front. I like to start my mornings (about 5:30am) at Starbucks. Passbook is great for this but sometimes it doesn't pop up right away. Then I like to sit there and study for several hours. The problem with this is that it will periodically pop up saying that there is a Starbucks nearby. I'd like it to 1) go silent for x-duration after I've accessed it at a location (or at least until I leave that geo-fence), and 2) allow me to silence it at certain times of the day. For example, if I'm driving at 1am I don't want Starbucks passes to let me know there is a closed business nearby.
I have noticed that since Starbucks first created their Passbook pass that the time it takes to update your account balance has jumped from up to an hour to nearly instantly. I'm not sure if that's an Apple change or a Starbucks change but I'd wager it's the former.
There is a lot of potential here but a lot more needs to be done to make this a more full-featured and understood app. I hope that we see more of this in iOS 7 and not something Apple will let stagnate like other projects.
Humm, how about Passbook businesses using the service in Europe. Other than one airline that is linked to Passbook, it is practically a non existant icon on my i Phone 5. When will that change.?
Don't know, but don't expect understanding from the defensive hive mind around here.
Yeah! Apple often takes the approach "if you build it… They will come".
Sometimes, this is not enough!
Who, here, will argue that Apple couldn't do a better job of promoting Passbook?
"Marketing" is making persons or organizations think that they need a product (or service) that you have to offer.
"Sales" is convincing them to buy it.
As to Passbook, Apple could do a better job of both.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by NasserAE
I doubt we will see this anytime soon.. not with Visa and MasterCard adding additional service fees to eWallets such as Googles and PayPals.
I just checked with Paypal. They claim 110 million active accounts. I don't think you realize how much pull Apple will have based on their customer base alone.
MasterCard has acknowledged that it needs Apple to bring NFC payments into the mainstream. That's could be a way for Apple to meet them (and Visa and PayPal) half-way. They wouldn't need a cut the same way other vendors get a cut; a fraction of a percent would be more than enough to ensure they "break even" which seems to be something they like to do with their iTunes Store sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
The only problem with saying all the iTunes accounts with credit cards will help Apple, is that all those people by definition already have a credit card, which is already very easy to use. It seems more likely that credit card companies will get together with retailers to add thumbprint readers (or something) to their cash registers, and just leave phone makers out of the loop.
The big question then becomes why haven't they bothered to yet? There are other security measures bounced around, like having your picture stored at Visa and when your card is swiped it pops up on the terminal. That simple idea would eliminate CC fraud as there's no way card duplicators could change your picture on file.
and why do CC companies allow Moneris and all the other payment processors to have terminals in stores? Why didn't they get together and make their own terminals and cut out the processor (middle man)?
So, bottom line. I've said the main article's hypothesis for years.
The battle that Apple is fighting is becoming the payment system for the upper quartile of the global consumer population... which accounts for most of the world's wealth. If you can eliminate plastic in your wallet for a single set of accounts that are all paid for by your AppleID registered CC, insured that only your phone and password, along your fingerprints/voiceprint, and all those 'membership cards' (store, starbucks, airline), are just apps in your phone, you'll be happy.
Passbook is a first phase, and hardly the end game. The end game will be an apple 'credit card' app, and inapp-purchases that integrate into Apple's Identification API (biometrics, risk analytics, and passing of 'certificates/coupons/tickets' to a 'display app.'
ToG
Is that really good enough security? Pictures can look very different with a hair change. And what about those that look similar to each other (many people using fake IDs are actually using a real ID of an older friend of family member).
On top of that, how do change the picture stored by the CC company? If you need to send it in can't someone who is committing fraud alter it if they know enough personal info? And how much will this slow down a retailer if they have to wait for an image to load for verification? What will be the cost for the new HW that has a display for a face comparison?
I think that's all too much effort. I'd rather just have a secure PIN and a "card" I can track and/or erase at will. This means NFC so one can't even use my "card" unless they have access into my phone and then the payment PIN on top of that. If I lose my phone I can secure erase it which is better than with a plastic credit card which I can only call and have canceled.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee
The big question then becomes why haven't they bothered to yet? There are other security measures bounced around, like having your picture stored at Visa and when your card is swiped it pops up on the terminal. That simple idea would eliminate CC fraud as there's no way card duplicators could change your picture on file.
and why do CC companies allow Moneris and all the other payment processors to have terminals in stores? Why didn't they get together and make their own terminals and cut out the processor (middle man)?
because it's a tiered system. Banks get Visa/Mastercard to front these short term credit instruments, and the cards organizations don't want to connect to millions of storefronts, in different risk strata, different countries, different banking rules, different consumer protection rules. Note that the credit card is not owned by VISA/MC/AMEX... or you... it's owned by a Bank! So you have Bank. CC. Merchant network (Card Payment system). Merchant. Buyer.
But... that was before the Internet. Look at Square and Intuit.
Now... look at your smartphone... look at a PoS device. Have one generate an invoice, the other read the invoice and assure payment... both meet 'immediately' in the cloud. That's ITMS... Why scan a CC when you can 'pass' a CC#(and a 1 time verifier), and you can then passback an approval from your 'paying institution' (Apple).
Like I said. Some day Apple will be it's own bank/credit card company... which you pay with one of your other credit cards, or an ACH... or... your Apple Bank account.
The key for passbook is to get high value vendors on board, since they have more r&d money to experiment on potential cash flow/customer service improvements.
Son of passbook will be an API driven financial authentication, approval and payment system that can be driven into any app
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird73
It will evolve. I actually find it quite useful. Target - Mobile coupons. Dunkin Donuts (Gift Cards), Walgreens are all official apps. Valpak and Coupons also are apps that feed in. Lemon Wallet is a great app, lets you add nearly any card to Passbook. I have added my Dental and Health ID cars, Best Buy Rewards Zone card. Could also add my Credit Cards and Drivers License if I wanted to.
That doesn't include the airlines. I only fly Southwest, and they have yet to add Passbook to their stable, but I am sure it will come.
I agree, it isn't 100% as "Apple simple" as other apps, but I have found it increasingly useful. I also like that, because of the way we have our iCloud set up, I can add a coupon to it from work and my wife, at the store, has access to it instantly.
I'm curios to know how you've added your dental and health cards to Passbook? This type of use would seem very handy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Is that really good enough security? Pictures can look very different with a hair change. And what about those that look similar to each other (many people using fake IDs are actually using a real ID of an older friend of family member).
On top of that, how do change the picture stored by the CC company? If you need to send it in can't someone who is committing fraud alter it if they know enough personal info? And how much will this slow down a retailer if they have to wait for an image to load for verification? What will be the cost for the new HW that has a display for a face comparison?
I think that's all too much effort. I'd rather just have a secure PIN and a "card" I can track and/or erase at will. This means NFC so one can't even use my "card" unless they have access into my phone and then the payment PIN on top of that. If I lose my phone I can secure erase it which is better than with a plastic credit card which I can only call and have canceled.
There is some merit to the CC picture. That is why the debit cards now have your picture on it. The fact is that in order to apply for a debit card you usually have to visit the bank where they take your picture. CC are done through the mail/Internet/phone but they could conceivably partner with your bank and get the same photo from them if the user requests. I always appreciate when the cashier asks for a drivers license to verify. At the grocery store they have never asked so I would suspect they get a lot of people with stolen credit cards in there as you can rack up a pretty big bill with some high priced food and consumable goods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quitchur Fussin
I'm curios to know how you've added your dental and health cards to Passbook? This type of use would seem very handy.
I'm curious how you can use it conveniently though. At my health care they swipe the card so if the card has to be manually typed in by the desk personnel how is that more efficient? You hold up the line of patients for the sake of lightening your wallet by a couple grams. Same thing for drivers license and auto insurance card. If you get pulled over you are just going to anger the cop not having the real license... and you know it is not so smart to anger a cop who has pulled you over.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
While some recent rumors have suggested an e-wallet could be tied to fingerprint scanning functionality in this year's so-called "iPhone 5S," he suggested such a feature may not be likely to materialize until 2014.
Agree. That would be too big a change for the usual "S-for-Speed" model year.
I'm on the even year track anyway, since I got my iPhone 5 last September.
And boy would I like that feature. Getting sick of typing out passwords / passcodes.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
But the key factor for Apple is iTunes: As of January, the company had more than a half-billion active iTunes accounts linked to credit cards.
Ya don't say.
Just wait until Wall Street hears about those "half-billion active iTunes accounts":
"Apple Falls Woefully Short of 1 Billion Customer Mark"
"Apple Won't Reach 1 Billion Customers for Years"
"Apple: 0.5 Billion Customers, McDonald's: 99+ Billion Customers"
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"We believe that Apple was never fully committed to mobile advertising as a product, and as a result Apple has not been as big a player in mobile ads as many expected when they announced," he said.
I believe iAd was targeted at TV from the start.
Apple is probably demo-ing iAds on prototypes of their future-TV 4K hardware right now.
Kiss the "commercial break" as we know it goodbye. iAds could be interactive, more
engaging, and most importantly, might require clicking through instead of blindly
fast-forwarding. If Apple really wants to, they will force us to interact with iAds in order
to continue viewing the show. Guaranteed attention to each and every iAd.
Yes, iAd will eventually be critical to Apple's mobile devices (possibly subsidizing them)
and of course to their TV solution (which may not be rolled out until 4K content and TVs become common).
But no, iAd isn't essential to Apple's success now. Just there as a Google ad-blocker in case Apple needs it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
Apple is probably demo-ing iAds on prototypes of their future-TV 4K hardware right now.
With 4K we will finally be able to read the fine print at the bottom of the automobile and home refinance commercials. Other than that I don't see 4K as a huge necessity except for major cinematic productions or sports slow motion replays. For your average sitcom or news broadcast 1080 already reveals plenty of detail on average sized TVs. I'm not sure how popular giant TVs are going to be in the future as typical family rooms are not growing proportionately to the rate of increase of available TV sizes. I know I certainly don't have anywhere to put an 80" TV.
If Apple is waiting for widespread 4K adoption before they release a TV, I think they will be waiting several more years.
1) The number of humans that have lived since the dawn of man falls far below 99 billion.
2) McDonalds has surely served more people than Apple considering the entry cost for a McDonald's product compared to Apple but Apple has CC numbers on file. We're not talking transactions, but actual cards with addresses, names, and security codes manually added by each of those half billion people so they can buy things from Apple. Only Amazon can be compared to Apple in this sense.
edit: Oops! I completely missed the point of your post. That's a huge lack of reading comprehension on my part. It's amazing how intelligence can drop so quickly when you are sick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Is that really good enough security? Pictures can look very different with a hair change. And what about those that look similar to each other (many people using fake IDs are actually using a real ID of an older friend of family member).
On top of that, how do change the picture stored by the CC company? If you need to send it in can't someone who is committing fraud alter it if they know enough personal info? And how much will this slow down a retailer if they have to wait for an image to load for verification? What will be the cost for the new HW that has a display for a face comparison?
They do it how drivers licenses are done here. You get your picture taken in the driver license office and it's stored on their computer. Sayyou lose your license and go down to get a new one. They have your old picture on file (along with you having to provide ID).
Banks who issue credit cards will do the same thing - take your picture when you open an account or get issued a CC. Pictures aren't "sent in".
The reason poeple can use fake ID is because the ID already has a picture and they can find someone "cloe enough" in looks to use it. If they don't have a copy of your picture to study, then how can they find someone who looks the same to commit the fraud?
Your point about the cost to implement the system is valid, and I suspect the CC companies are happy paying their current costs in fraud vs updating the system and upsetting customers with increased security/less ease of use of paying with a CC. I think this is why we haven't seen any major advances in security. Most merchants are already connected with internet so the time to send an image in minimal (it can be sent as soon as the card is swiped).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Only Amazon can be compared to Apple in this sense.
As I mentioned above it appears Amazon is far behind Apple with perhaps 120 million users (although they don't release numbers).
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
Apple doesn't sign up businesses. They put the tools out there and let folks pick to use them or not.
I feel your pain. I don't see any reason why my local grocery cards, my library card etc can't be in passbook, but that's their call, not Apples
Then perhaps Apple needs to change it's approach and begin actively trying to sway business to use/and or see the value of the Passbook app.. In my experience with family/friends, Passbook's purpose is not very well understood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vantaa Mike
Humm, how about Passbook businesses using the service in Europe. Other than one airline that is linked to Passbook, it is practically a non existant icon on my i Phone 5. When will that change.?
It's a fair question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Why do you think this is Apple's question to answer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
That's like asking "I ask you then, why is there a language called HTML? I don't have access to this Inter-Net," in 1994.
No, it isn't. There's no 'signing up'. It's on the businesses themselves to build compatibility into their apps and websites. Apple has already done all the work they have to do. You cannot pin this on them.
It's like blaming the owner of a patent (who has opened it for free licensing) for people not adopting said patent. That's insane. He has already done all of the work.
And a third time: This. Is. Not. Apple's. Responsibility. The app has been executed well; that's not what you're talking about earlier. It has a feature set and it excels at what it does. People claiming it has (or should have) a different feature set may do that all they wish. What they may not do is BLAME Apple for NOT having that feature set.
But again, that's a different argument. Yours is that it's somehow Apple's responsibility to force companies to use it. But it's really on THEM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allenbf
Passbook is great, and I do wish more companies would utilize it. However, I also agree with TS above, that isn't Apple's responsibility. They provide developer tools and an app store, but if a business doesn't design and code an app, that isn't Apple's fault; same deal with Passbook. They provided the tools but it isn't their responsibility to 'sign businesses up.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
No, it's an example of your lack of proper understanding of the situation.
Apples approach on this is universal. They put the tool out there but it's up to each company to use it. Or as the old saying goes, they have led the horses to the water, but the horse has to choose to drink
I'm a bit dumbfounded by the "flawgic" in response to a fair question. Didn't some of you belittle Google for the lack of apps on Android? Isn't it natural for any company developing a platform to invite, entice 3rd parties to use it? Even Apple shouldn't rely alone on "build it and they will come?"
Sure, the development part may be done, but to not proactively and very actively promote the use of Passbook makes no sense (and I believe they are doing it). Although I don't think many consumers purchased the iPhone for Passbook alone, it is part of the ecosystem that Apple markets. It's hyperbolic to talk about "forcing" 3rd parties to use it, and merely a tool to mock the OP (and to what end?). Companies are the contents of Passbook. Actively "signing up" companies for Passbook is equivalent to making more music, movies and TV shows available for iTunes (with the difference that there is no revenue stream from Passbook).
Furthermore, Apple's approach is not geographically universal. They put more effort into marketing (to consumers and partners) in the US than anywhere else. They are starting to make China a priority but there is hardly parity from the point of view of contents. Having said that, I'd also argue Apple does a superior job outside of the US in comparison to Amazon and Google. So, it seems the norm for American companies to believe that US-based contents alone deserve significant investment of effort.
Apple's approach is also not universal from a non-geographic perspective. They have abandoned some initiatives before. So it is fair for someone to ask "what's up with Passbook," without being piled on as if he asked a dumb question. In this instance, it is the answers and not the question that are ill posed.
Originally Posted by stelligent
It's a fair question.
How?
Didn't some of you belittle Google for the lack of apps on Android?
"Not I," said the cat. It's not Google's fault. They've done everything they need to do to get apps made; that they're not made (if they're not made) is the work of the developer.
The only argument in this regard that can be made is to the quality of the platform for which the [whatever] is developed, but that wasn't his complaint.
I would agree with Passbook being a lot like Android's (and other OSes) development platform. They built something that doesn't appear to be completely thought out and now they expect 3rd-parties to figure out how it can be useful. Apple didn't do that with Xcode for iOS or the App Store which is why I think Apple's 3rd-party app platform is so successful.
That said, I do use Passbook nearly every day but it's certainly not evolved as quickly as I'd like it to on any front. I like to start my mornings (about 5:30am) at Starbucks. Passbook is great for this but sometimes it doesn't pop up right away. Then I like to sit there and study for several hours. The problem with this is that it will periodically pop up saying that there is a Starbucks nearby. I'd like it to 1) go silent for x-duration after I've accessed it at a location (or at least until I leave that geo-fence), and 2) allow me to silence it at certain times of the day. For example, if I'm driving at 1am I don't want Starbucks passes to let me know there is a closed business nearby.
I have noticed that since Starbucks first created their Passbook pass that the time it takes to update your account balance has jumped from up to an hour to nearly instantly. I'm not sure if that's an Apple change or a Starbucks change but I'd wager it's the former.
There is a lot of potential here but a lot more needs to be done to make this a more full-featured and understood app. I hope that we see more of this in iOS 7 and not something Apple will let stagnate like other projects.
Yeah! Apple often takes the approach "if you build it… They will come".
Sometimes, this is not enough!
Who, here, will argue that Apple couldn't do a better job of promoting Passbook?
"Marketing" is making persons or organizations think that they need a product (or service) that you have to offer.
"Sales" is convincing them to buy it.
As to Passbook, Apple could do a better job of both.