Soli

eightzero said:

GeorgeBMac said:

eightzero said:

GeorgeBMac said:

Soli said:

eightzero said:

ihatescreennames said:

eightzero said:

Soli said:

eightzero said:

This is interesting:

HOW TO PAY

You can make electronic payments using Apple Wallet to initiate electronic fund transfers (e.g., ACH or debit) from your (i) Apple Cash account or (ii) a bank account(s) with a financial institution located in the U.S. (each, a "Payment Source Account").

It seems this is the exclusive way to pay, i.e. you cannot opt to receive a paper statement in the mail, and drop a check back to them; or go to a web site to pay via ACH. It also seems to imply that an ACH fund transfer option is coming to Apple Wallet (in addition to the debit card option already there.) I am guessing that Apple Wallet will allow scanning of a blank check. 

[edit] it might actually be easier than that. I have bank amount information in Apple Wallet now so as to be able to transfer FROM Apple Pay Cash to the bank; perhaps they will simply alter this at rollout to allow transfer TO Apple Pay cash via that same ACH information.

I don’t know if I’m following 100%, but I’d say ACH is already an option with Apple Cash (formally Apple Pay Cash). They asp have an instant wire option for a smal fee.

I typically use thé ACH when I transfer to my bank since it usually happens same day.

It is not currently an option. You can't ACH funds from a bank account TO Apple Pay Cash. 

I can. I choose the Apple Cash card and then tap “Add Money”. That money comes out of my checking account. If not that way how does one initially put money into the Apple Cash account (other than and Apple Cash payment from someone else, but how did they get money into Apple Cash?)?

That is likely via a debit card, not ACH transfer. I put money in from a MC gift card.

Soli said:

eightzero said:

Soli said:

eightzero said:

This is interesting:

HOW TO PAY

You can make electronic payments using Apple Wallet to initiate electronic fund transfers (e.g., ACH or debit) from your (i) Apple Cash account or (ii) a bank account(s) with a financial institution located in the U.S. (each, a "Payment Source Account").

It seems this is the exclusive way to pay, i.e. you cannot opt to receive a paper statement in the mail, and drop a check back to them; or go to a web site to pay via ACH. It also seems to imply that an ACH fund transfer option is coming to Apple Wallet (in addition to the debit card option already there.) I am guessing that Apple Wallet will allow scanning of a blank check. 

[edit] it might actually be easier than that. I have bank amount information in Apple Wallet now so as to be able to transfer FROM Apple Pay Cash to the bank; perhaps they will simply alter this at rollout to allow transfer TO Apple Pay cash via that same ACH information.

I don’t know if I’m following 100%, but I’d say ACH is already an option with Apple Cash (formally Apple Pay Cash). They asp have an instant wire option for a smal fee.

I typically use thé ACH when I transfer to my bank since it usually happens same day.

It is not currently an option. You can't ACH funds from a bank account TO Apple Pay Cash. 

That’s instant for me trom my checking account via a debit card. Your bank doesn‘t offer a debit card?

I don't want a debit card. I never use them, and it is another source of liability.

I'd rather use a debit card for, well debits, than using my bank account and routing numbers. If my debit (or credit card) becomes compromised I can cancel that card and replace it with a quick call not to mention getting any charges credited back, but canceling my bank account so I can reopen another one requires me going into my bank, sitting down with someone. It's just a hassle. I really dislike the few accounts that require me to put in that info for the convenience of using it online just to save them a couple percentage points. I wish debit cards could be used for credits beyond charge backs.

Yeh, if your cards are used fraudently you are pretty well protected.   If your routing & account numbers are used fraudently you are mostly on your own -- there's no $50 limit -- and meanwhile your account can be drained which then may trigger a rash of fees for minimum deposits, NSFs, etc....

I don't think this is true. An account holder is not responsible for a fraudulent transfer. There are diligence requirements of course, but there are limits of liability.

I think the onus will be on you to prove it was fraudulent -- that you or somebody you authorized didn't do it.   Meanwhile, while you do that, your account has been cleaned out and your checks bouncing all over the place.     If nothing else, it's the same caution given about using Debit Cards -- it's your money being directly exposed instead of the bank's money.

I suspect that one big reason it is not a major problem is the banking system is so tied down that the transaction would be fairly easy for an investigator to track directly to a company or person.   And the penalties are steep.

Again, I don't think it works like this. I will never have "chess bouncing all over the pace" because I don't write checks. Never use them. Your point is fair in that perhaps a debit card is a buffer others need. I do not. 

You not writing checks doesn’t mean you can’t have checks written in your name when your account and routing numbers are known. There are intrinsic benefits to a card, especially one used via Apple Pay.

Wgkrueger said:

SoundJudgment said:

Soli said:

I know I'll be killing my Barclay Card shortly after getting my Apple Card.

I will be killing most of my secondary credit-cards as well. Time to clean house.

You may have researched it already but if not you might want to make sure this doesn’t negatively affect your credit score. It’s counterintuitive but I’ve read canceling credit cards reduces your score. 

Dropping a credit card can negatively affect your credit score in at least 3 ways. It can drop because the total credit limit is lower, which may also affect your percentage of used available credit (try to keep this under 10%), and if this is your oldest credit card then the length of time for your revolving credit will drop.

I don’t think it’s counterintuitive. It’s something you need to be actively proving for it to have value.

Rayz2016 said:

Soli said:

This wasn't a big issue since the data was already anonymized and yet they're taking even more steps to help ensure user security. I wish more companies acted this way.

The real problem is that Apple didn’t give folk an opt-out from day one. 

The irony is that they ran into a privacy problem while trying to ensure Siri didn’t run into a privacy problem. 

It’ll be interesting to see how they get around this one. The conversational changes coming to Siri are game-changing; shame if they get derailed. 

I agree about the lack of an opt-out (or a preferred opt-in).

I've mentioned countless times on this forum that I really like how Amazon keeps the user involved with Alexa requests. Now, I don't mean how they handle security, but how the user can access their recordings and what Alexa thought they said after the wake word was spoken, at which point they can rate the result. I've only ever let Amazon know when it's been particularly bad or wrong (which usually means getting the context wrong, not the actual words spoken). I'd still love for Apple to incorporate this option so you can choose to send a bad results—whatever they may be—to a Siri team so they can see if they can tweak the system down the road with better efficiency, not unlike how you can submit incorrect Map items to their mapping team.

nicholfd said:

Soli said:

rogifan_new said:

9secondkox2 said:

Sucks to be the consumer these days. 

For a while it seemed things were we’re lining up nicely to ditch the greedy cable companies and get great new tech deals with just a couple providers. 

Now all the content tent is broken up as everyone and their mom are doing their own service. 

Cbs sucks outside of a couple properties. No thanks. Disney + just killed a great value in Netflix, Apple doing their own, etc. sheesh. By the time you’re done, you spend more than cable. 

It’s like music prior to iTunes. A mess. 

And there is no one to fix it anymore. 

And now NBC/Comcast announced their own service starting in 2020. I keep thinking imagine if every nig name record label had their own streaming service instead of nearly everything being available on AM, Spotify, Google ect. It would suck. I guess the TV and movie industry sees how the music industry is in a world of hurt and says they’re not going down that route.

Why are you posting about NBC having a streaming service like it's something they've never done? As far as I can tell Comcast still owns 1/3 of Hulu.

Actually Disney is buying out 100% of Hulu: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/business/media/disney-hulu-comcast.html

Announced in May.

1STnTENDERBITS's link shows that the full buyout won't happen for 5 more years. But regardless, my larger point is that NBC has already been in this game for 13 years with Hulu. Maybe they've lost all their IP and maybe they're restricted to certain types of competition with this deal to Disney, but I doubt they've lost everyone involved with the knowhow to create another service.

Personally, I have a Hulu subscription and pay for the ad-free option. Those are reasonable monthly cost to me, especially considering how many shows are available the day after they air on broadcast television and how many have full seasons and/or series available. What I don't find personally reasonable are the costs for all their other options. It's been well over a decade since I've paid for cable TV but this seems pricey. Unless you really only watch a very limited number of shows or a very select type of show that can steer you toward a very specific streaming service there's a high potential for paying more than you were before for the same type of services… and this is before we factor in cable companies broadband internet service providers charging us a premium for opting to only have internet and not a TV being piped into our homes.

.

Everyone interested (party of one on this forum) should wait to see if reviewers get their hands on it and how they rate it before deciding to dive in.

macxpress said:

So they're gonna try to launch it along side the next iPhone then? We'll see how that works out. 

I don't see this as an iPhone competitor. Sure, you can only use one smartphone at a time, but people who are willing to buy this either are collectors who have more than enough funds to also buy an iPhone or simply aren't Apple customers to begin with. Even without their initial failure and setback the unit sales were going to be poor for this product.