That's not accurate at all. Apple Pay employs both a token and cryptogram.
Cryptogram is the same as the 3DSecure message that you get asked to type in online, except this one gets generated from the secure enclave for you. Like I said, Apple Pay is the credit card tokenization system.
That's not accurate at all. Apple Pay employs both a token and cryptogram.
Cryptogram is the same as the 3DSecure message that you get asked to type in online, except this one gets generated from the secure enclave for you. Like I said, Apple Pay is the credit card tokenization system.
You said both "it's just Visa and Mastercard tokenization" and that it's nothing more than a rebranding. There's a reason why Apple don't have payments go through their system and why it took so long for others (who want to track you) to get on board. If you can't see what Apple did in SW and HW to make it more safe for everyone then you're just not trying.
I don’t understand how the merchant plays a part in whether Apple Pay is available at a location.
In this case Starbucks have their own app but I’m talking about in the general sense where credit cards are accepted as payment.
In Australia, the bank sets up its infrastructure to support Apple Pay and then any place that accepts tap and go is now Apple Pay compatible if your bank allows you to load up your card into Apple Pay.
Tap and go has been available since years before Apple Pay ever arrived here.
I don’t understand how the merchant plays a part in whether Apple Pay is available at a location.
In this case Starbucks have their own app but I’m talking about in the general sense where credit cards are accepted as payment.
In Australia, the bank sets up its infrastructure to support Apple Pay and then any place that accepts tap and go is now Apple Pay compatible if your bank allows you to load up your card into Apple Pay.
Tap and go has been available since years before Apple Pay ever arrived here.
How does the model differ in the US?
Structurally it's no different. All the pieces have to be in place. The only difference is only about half of our retail locations, according to Apple, support NFC-baed (aka "tap and go") payments at this point.
More accept them than they realize because whomever they have their payment system through sent them an NFC-capable card reader when they sent them a new card reader a couple years back for chip cards, but in my area I always seem to be the only one that uses it and most of the time the person at the check out is shocked. Shocking, to me, are that there are too many young people that don't seem to know the tech exists, and to a lesser extent think it's only on phones, not Watches.
Then you have some places with old readers that don't support NFC-based payments, major changes with full on WinCE-baed registers with the card swipe built into the register which they're not ready to update, boutique shops using Square or some other terminal that uses and iPad that was built before they included an option for chip cards and/or NFC-baed payments, and, finally, places like CVS, Home Depot, and Walmart which may have supported NFC-based payments years ago but killed access as soon as Apple Pay launched.
This was always going to be a slow burn to get people to adopt, but every year more retailers (more ATMs), more users, and more countries and their financial institution are coming online. People that expected it to be like flipping a light switch aren't being realistic.
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
It sounds to me like you're being negative and you never make a case as to why the results in the article "shouldn't be" the way they are stated. Why don't you explain why one merchant with 27K stores and about 700 transactions per store per day, according to online data, should be lower than a supplemental feature from Apple? How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it? How many of them use it daily, like coffee drinkers tend to use coffee? There may be a case for the article being wrong, but neither your tone or one sentence "should not" reply address it.
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
It sounds to me like you're being negative and you never make a case as to why the results in the article "shouldn't be" the way they are stated. Why don't you explain why one merchant with 27K stores and about 700 transactions per store per day, according to online data, should be lower than a supplemental feature from Apple? How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it? How many of them use it daily, like coffee drinkers tend to use coffee? There may be a case for the article being wrong, but neither your tone or one sentence "should not" reply address it.
Ok. I guess we're glossing over the fact that you based your previous reply on a misrepresentation of my argument. Moving on..
I thought the answer was obvious. Perhaps not. There are >100,000,000 million iphones in use in the US. According to Apple, 1/2 of all merchants use Apple Pay. How many merchants are in the US? I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
And what are you talking about "supplemental feature"? So you're basing your argument on semantics??
"How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it?" THAT'S THE POINT. They don't. Which is why the *rollout* is clearly a failure.
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
It sounds to me like you're being negative and you never make a case as to why the results in the article "shouldn't be" the way they are stated. Why don't you explain why one merchant with 27K stores and about 700 transactions per store per day, according to online data, should be lower than a supplemental feature from Apple? How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it? How many of them use it daily, like coffee drinkers tend to use coffee? There may be a case for the article being wrong, but neither your tone or one sentence "should not" reply address it.
Ok. I guess we're glossing over the fact that you based your previous reply on a misrepresentation of my argument. Moving on..
I thought the answer was obvious. Perhaps not. There are >100,000,000 million iphones in use in the US. According to Apple, 1/2 of all merchants use Apple Pay. How many merchants are in the US? I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
And what are you talking about "supplemental feature"? So you're basing your argument on semantics??
"How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it?" THAT'S THE POINT. They don't. Which is why the *rollout* is clearly a failure.
There's a lot to unpack here, but let me start with just one item that stuck out to me…
I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
That's news to me. Maybe I've missed it, but I thought they still just had card readers and IR scanners, no NFC-based payment in their stores.
Here in Canada, we have broad support for Apple Pay, but I've only used it once in the past year. Maybe pulling out the wallet that's always with me is a hard habit to break?
Agreed. I know Tim Horton's takes AP as does London Drugs. Other than that I'm sure a lot of places COULD accept it, but there's no indication, and I don't want to hold up the line trying to find out if they do. As far as old habits are concerned, it's just as easy to pull out my card as it is my phone. Out, tap, done. Worst of all though, it's been long enough that if I try to use AP, everyone will assume that I know how, which I don't. So, I have my MC entered into Wallet. All I have to do is call to authorize it, but I haven't. Someday when I have time, and want to figure out how to use it I will, but not so far. Yes AP is more secure than even a chip card. But there hasn't been a compelling reason to switch. Of course part of the problem is that 90% of my spending is on my Debit Card, which does not work with AP.
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
It sounds to me like you're being negative and you never make a case as to why the results in the article "shouldn't be" the way they are stated. Why don't you explain why one merchant with 27K stores and about 700 transactions per store per day, according to online data, should be lower than a supplemental feature from Apple? How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it? How many of them use it daily, like coffee drinkers tend to use coffee? There may be a case for the article being wrong, but neither your tone or one sentence "should not" reply address it.
Ok. I guess we're glossing over the fact that you based your previous reply on a misrepresentation of my argument. Moving on..
I thought the answer was obvious. Perhaps not. There are >100,000,000 million iphones in use in the US. According to Apple, 1/2 of all merchants use Apple Pay. How many merchants are in the US? I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
And what are you talking about "supplemental feature"? So you're basing your argument on semantics??
"How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it?" THAT'S THE POINT. They don't. Which is why the *rollout* is clearly a failure.
There's a lot to unpack here, but let me start with just one item that stuck out to me…
I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
That's news to me. Maybe I've missed it, but I thought they still just had card readers and IR scanners, no NFC-based payment in their stores.
Starbucks doesn't make it obvious, but they take Apple Pay. I use it there all the time.
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
It sounds to me like you're being negative and you never make a case as to why the results in the article "shouldn't be" the way they are stated. Why don't you explain why one merchant with 27K stores and about 700 transactions per store per day, according to online data, should be lower than a supplemental feature from Apple? How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it? How many of them use it daily, like coffee drinkers tend to use coffee? There may be a case for the article being wrong, but neither your tone or one sentence "should not" reply address it.
Ok. I guess we're glossing over the fact that you based your previous reply on a misrepresentation of my argument. Moving on..
I thought the answer was obvious. Perhaps not. There are >100,000,000 million iphones in use in the US. According to Apple, 1/2 of all merchants use Apple Pay. How many merchants are in the US? I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
And what are you talking about "supplemental feature"? So you're basing your argument on semantics??
"How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it?" THAT'S THE POINT. They don't. Which is why the *rollout* is clearly a failure.
There's a lot to unpack here, but let me start with just one item that stuck out to me…
I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
That's news to me. Maybe I've missed it, but I thought they still just had card readers and IR scanners, no NFC-based payment in their stores.
Starbucks doesn't make it obvious, but they take Apple Pay. I use it there all the time.
To be clear, you’re saying that every Starbucks has an NFC reader in the store to directly accept Apple Pay?
One merchant, selling one type of product, should not be beating ApplePay in use.
They have a store on every block with a huge number of repeat customers all making small payments and wanting to get rewards for a purchase. While I use Apple Pay to reload my Starbucks card, that's just one use for a reload compared to about 10-12 uses with their rewards card until I need to reload again.
I can currently shop in a day with only using Apple Pay, and that is only going to be a handlful of times. If you added up the dollar values, not the number of transactions, my Apple Pay usage is considerably higher than with Starbuck, but sure, go ahead and say it's a completely failure.
Why do you always have some negative nancy take on my posts.. while simultaneously misrepresenting them? I didn't say Apple Pay is a failure, quite the opposite. I said the rollout is a failure, which it clearly is if there's more starbucks transactions than Apple Pay transactions taking place. Also, I don't remember discussing whether or not the revenue volume is higher or not. I'm sure you're right about Apple Pay being higher, but that doesn't change anything I'm saying. You explain why starbucks payments are popular in transaction numbers, but not why they should be more popular than Apple Pay.
It sounds to me like you're being negative and you never make a case as to why the results in the article "shouldn't be" the way they are stated. Why don't you explain why one merchant with 27K stores and about 700 transactions per store per day, according to online data, should be lower than a supplemental feature from Apple? How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it? How many of them use it daily, like coffee drinkers tend to use coffee? There may be a case for the article being wrong, but neither your tone or one sentence "should not" reply address it.
Ok. I guess we're glossing over the fact that you based your previous reply on a misrepresentation of my argument. Moving on..
I thought the answer was obvious. Perhaps not. There are >100,000,000 million iphones in use in the US. According to Apple, 1/2 of all merchants use Apple Pay. How many merchants are in the US? I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
And what are you talking about "supplemental feature"? So you're basing your argument on semantics??
"How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it?" THAT'S THE POINT. They don't. Which is why the *rollout* is clearly a failure.
There's a lot to unpack here, but let me start with just one item that stuck out to me…
I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
That's news to me. Maybe I've missed it, but I thought they still just had card readers and IR scanners, no NFC-based payment in their stores.
Starbucks doesn't make it obvious, but they take Apple Pay. I use it there all the time.
To be clear, you’re saying that every Starbucks has an NFC reader in the store to directly accept Apple Pay?
I believe so. Every one I've been to does. It's available through the number pad thing that's next to the IR scanner. I don't believe there's any NFC or Apple Pay symbol presented until the employee activates it to accept the payment.
Um so Apple is the leader in mobile pay not Starbucks. I cant use my Starbucks app to pay at my drug store or any other store other than Starbucks. This is kinda of a stupid comparison, no?
There can be multiple ways of defining the "leader." This article is comparing active users, saying there are more active users of Starbucks payment app than Apple Pay. This is remarkable considering Starbucks app can only be used at Starbucks stores while Apple Pay is accepted at a gazillion locations.
Personally, I have only used Apple Pay once in the last 12 month, and that too at the insistence of the checkout guy at Apple Store. I get no extra benefit by using Apple Pay over my credit card, while with Starbucks app I get to skip the wait, earn free drinks, etc.
Well if you don’t understand the security benefits of Apple Pay versus regular credit card, of course you won’t used it.
Chip based credit cards, as being used in Europe, are as secure as Apple Pay. In fact Apple just emulates a chip base credit card
I've gotten free credits at Starbucks that required me to load into the app, which prompted me to install and register it. Not a huge starbucks fan, but my yearly spend there is probably ~$20.
I use Apple Pay quite a bit. Even would say that those grocery stores that don't accept it now get much less of my business and I'm anxiously awaiting gas station adoption. My yearly spend right now is ~ $5,000 and increasing.
Obviously this is statistically irrelevant, however I think it's illustrative that when numbers like those in the article are posted they certainly don't tell the whole story. I count as one registered user for each platform, but not all users are created equal.
The Sheetz gas station by my house provides Apple Pay at the pump (I don't know if it's nationwide). But, its fussy: It will take ApplePay if its tied to my Chase Card but not if I have it set to my Discover card...
I stopped going to that station a few years back after my credit card was hacked. But now that it takes ApplePay for gas its the most secure payment option available.
This "Starbucks vs ApplePay" is an old issue dating back to the inception of ApplePay: Starbucks and others want you to use their store cards and reward you for doing so. In the case of Starbuck's you get "stars" leading to free drinks by using their app. So, comparing ApplePay to the Starbuck's app is simply not comparing Apple to Apples...
Comments
Like I said, Apple Pay is the credit card tokenization system.
https://developer.apple.com/library/content/documentation/PassKit/Reference/PaymentTokenJSON/PaymentTokenJSON.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014929
https://bankinnovation.net/2014/09/heres-how-the-security-behind-apple-pay-will-really-work/
In this case Starbucks have their own app but I’m talking about in the general sense where credit cards are accepted as payment.
In Australia, the bank sets up its infrastructure to support Apple Pay and then any place that accepts tap and go is now Apple Pay compatible if your bank allows you to load up your card into Apple Pay.
Tap and go has been available since years before Apple Pay ever arrived here.
How does the model differ in the US?
More accept them than they realize because whomever they have their payment system through sent them an NFC-capable card reader when they sent them a new card reader a couple years back for chip cards, but in my area I always seem to be the only one that uses it and most of the time the person at the check out is shocked. Shocking, to me, are that there are too many young people that don't seem to know the tech exists, and to a lesser extent think it's only on phones, not Watches.
Then you have some places with old readers that don't support NFC-based payments, major changes with full on WinCE-baed registers with the card swipe built into the register which they're not ready to update, boutique shops using Square or some other terminal that uses and iPad that was built before they included an option for chip cards and/or NFC-baed payments, and, finally, places like CVS, Home Depot, and Walmart which may have supported NFC-based payments years ago but killed access as soon as Apple Pay launched.
This was always going to be a slow burn to get people to adopt, but every year more retailers (more ATMs), more users, and more countries and their financial institution are coming online. People that expected it to be like flipping a light switch aren't being realistic.
I thought the answer was obvious. Perhaps not. There are >100,000,000 million iphones in use in the US. According to Apple, 1/2 of all merchants use Apple Pay. How many merchants are in the US? I don't think I need to crunch any more numbers to compare that to 27,000 starbucks locations (ALL OF WHICH TAKE APPLE PAY).
And what are you talking about "supplemental feature"? So you're basing your argument on semantics??
"How many people that have access to Apple Pay use it?" THAT'S THE POINT. They don't. Which is why the *rollout* is clearly a failure.
That's news to me. Maybe I've missed it, but I thought they still just had card readers and IR scanners, no NFC-based payment in their stores.
Anyways Apple and Starbucks belong together. Hope they marry soon.
Even in the old original Google Wallet long before Apple Pay was even a thing the card details were tokenized and "cyrptogrammed" AFAIK.