EsquireCats

This is where the Apple Watch really shines, it is a simple double click of the side button on approach to the reader/turnstile. Plus the button is big enough to press through a sleeve during the cooler months.

The phone on the other hand is a pain, first take it from the pocket, then either bring up wallet or let it activate from being in the proximity of the reader, then authenticate through face id - which isn't always convenient.

So if these are legit screenshots, why is the titlebar digital time different from the analogue time on the clock app icon?

seanismorris said:

Every time I reload my iPad or iPhone, I have to reinput all my banking information for Apple Pay.

We’ll see if the card is ready for prime time.  I require better sync...

Apple Pay enabled cards are saved into iCloud. Manually reentering CC details is only needed for regular credit cards.

Additionally the card will automatically populate the familiar drop-down CC selection box when being used on websites (so there is no need to go hunting for the numbers when making purchases online through payment gateways that don't support apple pay.)

Unsurprisingly all we heard in the press was how these developers were blindsided by Apple. Meanwhile it looks like Apple reached out to them and asked them to discontinue using the tools improperly. Funny how developers caught red handed will run to the press.

Having the largest pool of standard essential patents isn't a free pass to abuse them. Such as by:

• Requiring multiple parties in a single production chain pay for the same patents over and over again.
• Forcing licensers to hold license for their entire intellectual property portfolio, including junk patents and not just the ones that pertain to implementing standards.
• Trying to charge based on a % of the RRP, when this has no bearing on the patent's value, the usefulness of the patent or the value of the balance of the device, while simultaneously being in opposition to the concept of FRAND terms.

Apple noticing that they're being ripped off for standard essential patents isn't malevolent scheming. Qualcomm's behaviour undermines the point of developing standards and why FRAND terms exist. This sets a precedent of companies involving themselves in standards, then rushing off to the patent office so they can rip off consumers in due course.

(If you want to see where this level of patent abuse ends up: look at medicine in India.)