From the looks of things Google hasn't had near the level of commitment that Apple was able to put together. No surprise about that either IMO. A whole lot of players hadn't been willing to give up any potential bit of control until Apple and their millions of users stepped up. Google has limited influence anyway since they only supply the software and OS but can't dictate the hardware, Huge advantage for Apple in that regard.
Google had the right idea, but there are problems with implementation -- little control over hardware, fragmented Android market and not quite the clout that Apple has with the wireless carriers. I have seen the reports that the wireless carriers, particularly Verizon, blocked the NFC portion of Google's Wallet point-of-sale payment system. This is an obvious conflict of interest since Verizon planned to profit from its partnership in the competing ISiS payment system. Subsequent events proved that name to be quite unfortunate. It was doomed to failure anyway, since a bulky add-on NFC hardware device was required.
More importantly, no one would trust the wireless carriers with a payment system anyway. The carriers have a sordid history in this area, including cramming bogus 3rd-party charges onto customers' bills, "slamming" expensive long-distance services onto customers' accounts, exorbitant text message charges, and so on.
I would trust a company like Apple or Google to do this, but never one of the wireless carriers. I wish Apple good luck, and I hope that the carriers will be completely cut out of the picture.
Many here will agree that @Gatorguy is not a troll. Being a Google advocate, and having a opposing POV does not equate to trolling. I'm certain that you're intelligent enough to know the difference.
Digitalclips is right. He's a subtle troll who will make statements he knows are false, but do so in such a carefully worded way so it doesn't come of as direct trolling.
I'd call a person who continually lies when they know the truth, a troll.
Digitalclips is right. He's a subtle troll who will make statements he knows are false, but do so in such a carefully worded way so it doesn't come of as direct trolling.
I'd call a person who continually lies when they know the truth, a troll.
A troll is as subtle as a hand grenade. Btw how are you certain that he's making purposefully erroneous statements? That's a bold accusation.
Apparently so subtle that you've never been able to post examples of my supposedly anti-Apple comments when challenged before to do so.
Look, I've no issue with anyone who intelligently disagrees with me, you included. That's what's great about a forum like AI. We share little known facts and stories from folks "who were there" in the trenches. Technical discussions of new technologies, often with information others of us never knew. Well-stated opinions we might not be exposed to on lesser sites. Sometimes viewpoints are even changed when what we thought we knew to be true gets questioned with new facts. IMO that's a good thing too.
Attempting to stifle or distract from those discussions by attacking the character of someone who courteously disagrees hinders intelligent discourse. Everything goes downhill from there so it certainly doesn't add anything to the forum.
So I really don't want to get into a pissing contest with you, especially considering that I've viewed you as a knowledgeable and considerate member for the most part. With that said I'd be very secure with a comparison of our contributions to the AI forums and feel we've both brought valuable things to share. Letting things become entangled in some personal war detracts from our generally on-topic and sometimes even informative posts.
There's days the personal insults on AI nearly drown out what would otherwise be intelligent if disagreeing opinions. .Is that the way you really want members to conduct themselves? "Think exactly like I do or get the heck out, facts be damned"? Someone has to stop and I for one will attempt to avoid replying to trollish comments going forward. They're generally foolish comments anyway so no purpose served getting down in the mud along with them.
Looking forward to things getting back as they were.
Thank you for this. There have been so many fact-free, analysis-free personal attacks lately, that is often difficult to find the meaningful posts. Although some of your posts in the past seemed to indicate some sort of an agenda, your more recent posts seem to offer something to at least think about--even if I might not agree with it. I appreciate your plea for posters to focus on intelligent, thoughtful posts instead of content-free name calling, insults and outlandish unsupported comments. Striving to be more civil and more informative will make AI better for everyone.
Trolling would be posting something just to get a reaction wouldn't it? Kinda like what you said your intent was? :rolleyes:
Troll verb
gerund or present participle: trolling
1. informal
make a deliberately offensive or provocative online posting with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.
1 .a troll (/?tro?l/, /?tr?l/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments.
I would admit you are a subtle version. Pretending to be offering up intelligent discourse. Anyone taking the time to read your vast trove of postings will find a Google advocate who simply cannot resist sowing seeds of doubt about Apple at every opportunity. That I would not object to if you simply admitted your true objectives, instead of your continuing pretense of being an Apple supporter.
I on the other hand come to AI to enthuse about and share Apple related information as I have since 1978 in one place or another.
Hear, hear!
@gg is one of the less than 10 ppl on my AI block list ... For the reasons given above, and because his posts appear to be designed to take the discussion off course and/or overwhelm reasoned participation.
I normally won't respond to (or quote) a post that includes a @gg post because it only contributes to his attempts to muddy the water and derail the thread!
Yeah, I already had, just messing with you, pretty much looks like game over and Apple will wins yet again.
How is it game over when all companies can use the exact same NFC POS terminals?
Because Apple Pay provides verification, through TouchID, that the "card holder" initiating the transaction is who he says he is -- without providing any personal or credit card data ... just an ad hoc, perishable (one-time, one place, one transaction) token.
Non-Apple Pay transactions are, at best, "card present" transactions validating the card data/pin -- but not that the "card holder" initiating the transaction is who he says he is ...
Even if the merchant asks to see additional ID -- it does not verify the cardholder -- it just, unnecessarily, exposes additional personal data (driver's license #, address, etc.).
Others, who use NFC with Smart Cards/PIN, have indicated that there is a small (e.g. 20 Euro) maximum-per-transaction and a small limit on transactions-per-day (similar to ATM withdrawals). I suspect that these restrictions are in place because the card-issuing banks realize that these (Smart Card/PIN) are not very secure transactions.
Put more simply, with Apple Pay, without accessing any user data:
the issuing bank knows that transaction is valid
the cc processor knows that transaction is valid
the merchant knows that transaction is valid
the cardholder knows that transaction is valid
There is no need to artificially limit the amount or number of trandactions.
The other side of the coin ...
Because of the strong validation, the fees/insurance/risk costs for each entity involved are reduced (or eliminated). In fact, in many ways, Apple Pay is better than cash.
Before long, we'll see the banks, processors and merchants incentivizing Apple Pay transactions (lower fees, cashback bonuses, discounts, etc).
Digitalclips is right. He's a subtle troll who will make statements he knows are false, but do so in such a carefully worded way so it doesn't come of as direct trolling.
I'd call a person who continually lies when they know the truth, a troll.
And yet again without any example from you of these continual lies. Surely you could have found at least one or two...
unless you're the one not being 100% truthful.
From the looks of things Google hasn't had near the level of commitment that Apple was able to put together. No surprise about that either IMO. A whole lot of players hadn't been willing to give up any potential bit of control until Apple and their millions of users stepped up. Google has limited influence anyway since they only supply the software and OS but can't dictate the hardware, Huge advantage for Apple in that regard.
Google Wallet's proposal apparently involved ceding way too much control; their servers would need to track every transaction (what a data-mining boon that would be!); far-sighted merchants and bankes could see Google acquiring in 10 years the kind of tyrannical control that Amazon is wielding today over book publishers. User interaction also is reported to be a bit clunkier and less convenient - the handset may need to be unlocked and the wallet app opened. These latter issues are well within Google's software chops to overcome, not so the former...
All in all I can only surmise that Apple Pay's ease of use, privacy protection and low per-transaction fee proved the clincher for widespread assent from the banks and clearing houses. Not to talk of the hordes of Touch-ID equipped, card-carrying iTunes users Apple brings to the fray, as the original poster has pointed out
As reported many times in the past, the main obstacles to NFC adoption has always been the naked desire on the part of its participating providers to focus on seizing as much of the "vertical value chain" for themselves rather than to secure, protect and enhance the consumer experience.
Really? And, you can prove this? (Unless you're just trying to be cute...)
A troll writes a one or two sentence post with zero substance with the sole purpose of inciting the readers. An argument is different from a discussion, and from what I've seen Gatorguy tries to provide information, and add something positive albeit opposing to the thread. At the end of the day you're entitled to your opinion, but in my book GG doesn't fit the accepted definition of a troll.
IMO I wouldn't classify him as such, and nothing other than someone that does happen to know quite a bit about Google and follows them closely. He also tends to go into detail why he has his beliefs and backs up a lot of his discussion with links. Whether the links or his arguments are valid... is up for discussion, which he in most cases conducts in a civil manner. Although (again) IMHO, he often falls into pedantry and a splitting of hairs to not be seen as losing an argument. There are a few others here that do the same from an Apple position... so I can't see a reason to condemn it. Also, many a thread is full of interesting information from both sides of a debate that he partakes in.
Now as for The Pazulu Desease that infects these threads from time to time.... that's something completely different... :no:
Note: I've mused quite often what a gathering of the regulars here in person would like... anyone up for a party? How 'bout at Gatorguys BYOi...
Google Wallet's proposal apparently involved ceding way too much control; their servers would need to track every transaction (what a data-mining boon that would be!); far-sighted merchants and bankes could see Google acquiring in 10 years the kind of tyrannical control that Amazon is wielding today over book publishers. User interaction also is reported to be a bit clunkier and less convenient - the handset may need to be unlocked and the wallet app opened. These latter issues are well within Google's software chops to overcome, not so the former...
All in all I can only surmise that Apple Pay's ease of use, privacy protection and low per-transaction fee proved the clincher for widespread assent from the banks and clearing houses. Not to talk of the hordes of Touch-ID equipped, card-carrying iTunes users Apple brings to the fray, as the original poster has pointed out
As reported many times in the past, the main obstacles to NFC adoption has always been the naked desire on the part of its participating providers to focus on seizing as much of the "vertical value chain" for themselves rather than to secure, protect and enhance the consumer experience.
Apple Pay will replace "Charge-A-Plates" and their progeny.
Oops ... I guess that Macy's forgot to tell Gimbels
Meanwhile in preparation for that EMP I'm learning morse code ...
I had to look Gimbels up ... never heard of them. I grew up knowing of Sears' existence though, my Gran had a massive catalog from the 1920s I used to peruse with fascination as a wee kid. It weighed more than me and was filled with things that were from another planet compared to England in the 1950s. I recall the stockings and corset section held my fascination above all else.
Google Wallet's proposal apparently involved ceding way too much control; their servers would need to track every transaction (what a data-mining boon that would be!); far-sighted merchants and bankes could see Google acquiring in 10 years the kind of tyrannical control that Amazon is wielding today over book publishers. User interaction also is reported to be a bit clunkier and less convenient - the handset may need to be unlocked and the wallet app opened. These latter issues are well within Google's software chops to overcome, not so the former...
All in all I can only surmise that Apple Pay's ease of use, privacy protection and low per-transaction fee proved the clincher for widespread assent from the banks and clearing houses. Not to talk of the hordes of Touch-ID equipped, card-carrying iTunes users Apple brings to the fray, as the original poster has pointed out
As reported many times in the past, the main obstacles to NFC adoption has always been the naked desire on the part of its participating providers to focus on seizing as much of the "vertical value chain" for themselves rather than to secure, protect and enhance the consumer experience.
Your last point, about seizing as much of the vertical value chain as possible, is the key point.
Verizon and the other carriers tried to do this by partnering with a few banks to create the ISIS system, now renamed "Softcard". No good can come from allowing the wireless carriers any control over a payment system, your bank account or your credit card. Why should consumers fork over a percentage of each transaction to the carriers? Where is the value added? We're already paying exorbitantly for access and bandwidth; there is no need to pay the carriers more.
I applaud Apple's effort because it basically cuts out the carriers, at least in terms of monetizing the transactions. A very good thing.
It would be even more of a good thing if the wireless carriers were reduced to "dumb pipes", meaning no control over (or profiting from) the content of the transmissions. And further, to reduce the carriers' control over the hardware manufacturers.
Apple Pay will replace "Charge-A-Plates" and their progeny.
...
Oops ... I guess that Macy's forgot to tell Gimbels
Meanwhile in preparation for that EMP I'm learning morse code ...
I had to look Gimbels up ... never heard of them. I grew up knowing of Sears' existence though, my Gran had a massive catalog from the 1920s I used to peruse with fascination as a wee kid. It weighed more than me and was filled with things that were from another planet compared to England in the 1950s. I recall the stockings and corset section held my fascination above all else.
Morse code, answer this ... Who did it
Growing up in the US, Macy's and Gimbel were two very competitive department store chains ... Always trying to one-up the other with sales, store windows ... A popular saying arose from this regarding a business not being open to discussing their plans in public, lest they lose a competitive edge: "Does Macy's tell Gimbels?".
Ahh ... The Sears catalog ... I, too, had a fascination for the women's unmentionables section ...
I thought it was only me, until I saw a TV interview of cartoonist Al Capp. He said that he was lustfully attracted by that section of the catalog -- and it provided inspiration for his later drawings of full-figured women in his comic strips ... Dailey Mae ... Appasionata Von Climax ...
It (the Sears catalog) was the Victoria's Secret of its day!
My sister is a high-level executive at USAA, and she told me about this a couple of weeks ago. She wouldn't give me a number, but she said that Apple is keeping a cut of every Apple Pay transaction. She also confirmed that the banks have given Apple a -really- good deal in terms of fees, liabilities and such. And yes, tokenization is a huge deal.
Good News.
Apple is the billionaire who shops at the thrift store.
Comments
Google had the right idea, but there are problems with implementation -- little control over hardware, fragmented Android market and not quite the clout that Apple has with the wireless carriers. I have seen the reports that the wireless carriers, particularly Verizon, blocked the NFC portion of Google's Wallet point-of-sale payment system. This is an obvious conflict of interest since Verizon planned to profit from its partnership in the competing ISiS payment system. Subsequent events proved that name to be quite unfortunate. It was doomed to failure anyway, since a bulky add-on NFC hardware device was required.
More importantly, no one would trust the wireless carriers with a payment system anyway. The carriers have a sordid history in this area, including cramming bogus 3rd-party charges onto customers' bills, "slamming" expensive long-distance services onto customers' accounts, exorbitant text message charges, and so on.
I would trust a company like Apple or Google to do this, but never one of the wireless carriers. I wish Apple good luck, and I hope that the carriers will be completely cut out of the picture.
Many here will agree that @Gatorguy is not a troll. Being a Google advocate, and having a opposing POV does not equate to trolling. I'm certain that you're intelligent enough to know the difference.
Digitalclips is right. He's a subtle troll who will make statements he knows are false, but do so in such a carefully worded way so it doesn't come of as direct trolling.
I'd call a person who continually lies when they know the truth, a troll.
A troll is as subtle as a hand grenade. Btw how are you certain that he's making purposefully erroneous statements? That's a bold accusation.
A troll is as subtle as a hand grenade.
Really? And, you can prove this? (Unless you're just trying to be cute...)
Thank you for this. There have been so many fact-free, analysis-free personal attacks lately, that is often difficult to find the meaningful posts. Although some of your posts in the past seemed to indicate some sort of an agenda, your more recent posts seem to offer something to at least think about--even if I might not agree with it. I appreciate your plea for posters to focus on intelligent, thoughtful posts instead of content-free name calling, insults and outlandish unsupported comments. Striving to be more civil and more informative will make AI better for everyone.
Lol ... And, they're off ...
Hear, hear!
@gg is one of the less than 10 ppl on my AI block list ... For the reasons given above, and because his posts appear to be designed to take the discussion off course and/or overwhelm reasoned participation.
I normally won't respond to (or quote) a post that includes a @gg post because it only contributes to his attempts to muddy the water and derail the thread!
I do so here, to support @digi calling him out!
Because Apple Pay provides verification, through TouchID, that the "card holder" initiating the transaction is who he says he is -- without providing any personal or credit card data ... just an ad hoc, perishable (one-time, one place, one transaction) token.
Non-Apple Pay transactions are, at best, "card present" transactions validating the card data/pin -- but not that the "card holder" initiating the transaction is who he says he is ...
Even if the merchant asks to see additional ID -- it does not verify the cardholder -- it just, unnecessarily, exposes additional personal data (driver's license #, address, etc.).
Others, who use NFC with Smart Cards/PIN, have indicated that there is a small (e.g. 20 Euro) maximum-per-transaction and a small limit on transactions-per-day (similar to ATM withdrawals). I suspect that these restrictions are in place because the card-issuing banks realize that these (Smart Card/PIN) are not very secure transactions.
Put more simply, with Apple Pay, without accessing any user data:
There is no need to artificially limit the amount or number of trandactions.
The other side of the coin ...
Because of the strong validation, the fees/insurance/risk costs for each entity involved are reduced (or eliminated). In fact, in many ways, Apple Pay is better than cash.
Before long, we'll see the banks, processors and merchants incentivizing Apple Pay transactions (lower fees, cashback bonuses, discounts, etc).
Tweets have replaced telegrams ...
Apple Pay will replace "Charge-A-Plates" and their progeny.
Oops ... I guess that Macy's forgot to tell Gimbels
Pay
And yet again without any example from you of these continual lies. Surely you could have found at least one or two...
unless you're the one not being 100% truthful.
Just curios, are there similar deals with Androids system? No doubt Gatorguy knows.
Quote:
Actually I had no idea but I knew how to look it up. Just Google it.
http://www.google.com/wallet//current-partners.html
From the looks of things Google hasn't had near the level of commitment that Apple was able to put together. No surprise about that either IMO. A whole lot of players hadn't been willing to give up any potential bit of control until Apple and their millions of users stepped up. Google has limited influence anyway since they only supply the software and OS but can't dictate the hardware, Huge advantage for Apple in that regard.
Google Wallet's proposal apparently involved ceding way too much control; their servers would need to track every transaction (what a data-mining boon that would be!); far-sighted merchants and bankes could see Google acquiring in 10 years the kind of tyrannical control that Amazon is wielding today over book publishers. User interaction also is reported to be a bit clunkier and less convenient - the handset may need to be unlocked and the wallet app opened. These latter issues are well within Google's software chops to overcome, not so the former...
All in all I can only surmise that Apple Pay's ease of use, privacy protection and low per-transaction fee proved the clincher for widespread assent from the banks and clearing houses. Not to talk of the hordes of Touch-ID equipped, card-carrying iTunes users Apple brings to the fray, as the original poster has pointed out
As reported many times in the past, the main obstacles to NFC adoption has always been the naked desire on the part of its participating providers to focus on seizing as much of the "vertical value chain" for themselves rather than to secure, protect and enhance the consumer experience.
A troll writes a one or two sentence post with zero substance with the sole purpose of inciting the readers. An argument is different from a discussion, and from what I've seen Gatorguy tries to provide information, and add something positive albeit opposing to the thread. At the end of the day you're entitled to your opinion, but in my book GG doesn't fit the accepted definition of a troll.
IMO I wouldn't classify him as such, and nothing other than someone that does happen to know quite a bit about Google and follows them closely. He also tends to go into detail why he has his beliefs and backs up a lot of his discussion with links. Whether the links or his arguments are valid... is up for discussion, which he in most cases conducts in a civil manner. Although (again) IMHO, he often falls into pedantry and a splitting of hairs to not be seen as losing an argument. There are a few others here that do the same from an Apple position... so I can't see a reason to condemn it. Also, many a thread is full of interesting information from both sides of a debate that he partakes in.
Now as for The Pazulu Desease that infects these threads from time to time.... that's something completely different... :no:
Note: I've mused quite often what a gathering of the regulars here in person would like... anyone up for a party? How 'bout at Gatorguys BYOi...
I agree with you whole heartedly.
Meanwhile in preparation for that EMP I'm learning morse code ...
I had to look Gimbels up ... never heard of them. I grew up knowing of Sears' existence though, my Gran had a massive catalog from the 1920s I used to peruse with fascination as a wee kid. It weighed more than me and was filled with things that were from another planet compared to England in the 1950s. I recall the stockings and corset section held my fascination above all else.
It's good to know Apple Pay got support from these banks.
Your last point, about seizing as much of the vertical value chain as possible, is the key point.
Verizon and the other carriers tried to do this by partnering with a few banks to create the ISIS system, now renamed "Softcard". No good can come from allowing the wireless carriers any control over a payment system, your bank account or your credit card. Why should consumers fork over a percentage of each transaction to the carriers? Where is the value added? We're already paying exorbitantly for access and bandwidth; there is no need to pay the carriers more.
I applaud Apple's effort because it basically cuts out the carriers, at least in terms of monetizing the transactions. A very good thing.
It would be even more of a good thing if the wireless carriers were reduced to "dumb pipes", meaning no control over (or profiting from) the content of the transmissions. And further, to reduce the carriers' control over the hardware manufacturers.
Morse code, answer this ... Who did it
Growing up in the US, Macy's and Gimbel were two very competitive department store chains ... Always trying to one-up the other with sales, store windows ... A popular saying arose from this regarding a business not being open to discussing their plans in public, lest they lose a competitive edge: "Does Macy's tell Gimbels?".
Ahh ... The Sears catalog ... I, too, had a fascination for the women's unmentionables section ...
I thought it was only me, until I saw a TV interview of cartoonist Al Capp. He said that he was lustfully attracted by that section of the catalog -- and it provided inspiration for his later drawings of full-figured women in his comic strips ... Dailey Mae ... Appasionata Von Climax ...
It (the Sears catalog) was the Victoria's Secret of its day!
Good News.
Apple is the billionaire who shops at the thrift store.