5 ms·

With all the available options why would you want to use a service that requires you to figure out if the other person uses an iPhone?

by guelo 11y ago

feld 11y ago
Who said it would be iPhone-only?
- finnn 11y ago
  Everything Apple has ever done historically (with mobile) has been iOS-only, what possible reason would there be to suspect this would be any different?
  - Alupis 11y ago
    And given the number of Android devices in the wild far, far surpasses the number of iOS devices... using this service seems like more of a hassle than not.
    - codyb 11y ago
      In NYC, iPhone users seem pretty heavily concentrated in Manhattan. This means certain groups of people are probably hanging out in nearly entirely iPhone user enclaves. [0] [0] - http://www.businessinsider.com/android-is-for-poor-people-maps-2014-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/android-is-for-poor-people-ma...
      - jolipparcreek 11y ago
        That article was very misleading[1] and I wonder why[2] people keep citing it… [1] here's a deconstruction of the data in the article: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158143/twitter-heat-map-shows-iphone-use-by-the-affluent-android-by-the-poor/40#post_2349718 http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158143/twitter-heat-map-sho... [2] here's one explanation why: http://readwrite.com/2013/01/29/why-do-americans-hate-android-and-love-apple http://readwrite.com/2013/01/29/why-do-americans-hate-androi...
        codyb 11y ago
        Hadn't seen that, thanks for the correction. Makes a lot of sense.
    - matthewmacleod 11y ago
      And given the number of Android devices in the wild far, far surpasses the number of iOS devices That's obviously true globally, but not for some of their more important markets. iOS and Android are roughly equivalent in the US for example, with the latter having maybe 10% more of the market – I think? While there's no doubt that instant money transfers are particularly useful in less developed markets, it's not like it wouldn't still be a useful service in the US.
      - Vraxx 11y ago
        One of the key differences here (for me at least) between an apple only app (assuming that is the case) and something like square cash is that if the person I want to send money to doesn't have an iPhone, I wouldn't be able to send them money, whereas if they don't have square cash I can tell them to download it and then send them money and with the current promotion, even get $5 for referring them.
        matthewmacleod 11y ago
        Absolutely true - but i imagine the conversation is: "I want to send you money. Do you have an iPhone?" "Yes" "Okay, here's the money." versus "Do you have an iPhone?" "No" "Okay, download SquareVenmoPal and I'll send it to you". There's a built-in audience for Apple Pay that might prove to be beneficial.
        Vraxx 11y ago
        Fair, my thought process always seems to conclude that having multiple apps is a downside, but that argument really doesn't hold up well once I consciously think about that fact.
  - BillinghamJ 11y ago
    Perhaps Apple Music (launched on Android today) is a sign of changing times?
    - MBCook 11y ago
      I doubt it. I think Apple Music is a trojan horse (much like the original iPod) to get people using their music service. They MAY release the payment stuff for Android (so users can receive payments) but I doubt they want to be a general payment provider for Android users.
      - ap3 11y ago
        What about android users that already have iTunes accounts via the Apple Music trojan horse ?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - ians 11y ago
    Not mobile but iTunes made it to Windows and now Apple Music is available on Android. It wouldn't be a first.
  - LeoPanthera 11y ago
    Apple Music just launched on Android.
  - feld 11y ago
    Don't Apple Pay and Android Pay operate almost identically now? The original Google Wallet/Pay implementation which I used years ago via NFC was different. I don't believe the Android Pay name change is just branding.
    - MBCook 11y ago
      I think Android Pay is like Apple Pay and Google Wallet is still available as a 'virtual' credit card that can be used with Android Pay.
matthewmacleod 11y ago
Well, do bear in mind that the iPhone is pretty popular – so you've probably got a decent chance of wanting to transfer money to someone with a compatible device – maybe 25% or so? Knowing Apple's UX, it'll be rather easy-to-use if it's available – so I'm not sure that the overhead of 'figuring out if the other person uses an iPhone' would be any higher than figuring out if they use Venmo or PayPal or Square or whatever the other options are.
- Alupis 11y ago
  > Knowing Apple's UX, it'll be rather easy-to-use How can we assume this? This exact thing has been tried many, many times - and sometimes to great success. What inherently makes you believe Apple's spin will be so much better than the other services and their unique problems? The challenge Apple will face has nothing to do with UX - it will have to do with userbase. It's likely (although not absolute) that using this service will require an iOS device. Given Android devices far outnumber iOS devices, this may pose a problem. Other services like PayPal and Square are universal services (device agnostic), and accounts are free (compared to Apple's barrier to entry which will likely cost you an iOS device).
  - matthewmacleod 11y ago
    How can we assume this? Obviously we can't know for sure – but it does seem like a pretty safe assumption. Apple Pay is a good experience at the moment; it's easy to see how that experience could be extended to inter-device transfers (bring them close together, enter the amount to transfer, Touch ID and done – or something similar). The challenge Apple will face has nothing to do with UX - it will have to do with user base. The service will likely be available instantly to literally tens of millions of people with no additional effort on their part, as soon as Apple roll out a software update. That's a big benefit for Apple. It's likely (although not absolute) that using this service will require an iOS device. Given Android devices far outnumber iOS devices, this may pose a problem. I think I responded to this elsewhere, but that's only true globally. Bear in mind that even Apple Pay is only available in the US and the UK at the moment; iOS share in those countries is around 40%. Other services like PayPal and Square are universal services (device agnostic), and accounts are free (compared to Apple's barrier to entry which will likely cost you an iOS device). They do have the additional barrier of not being available to all users by default, though.
MBCook 11y ago
My whole family and many of my friends use iPhones. iPhones are extremely secure thanks to TouchID and Apple's software. Apple already has payment info for me and a good relationship with banks. They're normally pretty great at UI and can integrate it into the OS in ways no 3rd party ever could. It will be built into the phone and come preinstalled so I don't have to convince people to install it. Apple shows a lot more respect for my privacy than other companies that I could see doing this (such as Facebook/Google) and isn't a company I already despise (PayPal, YMMV when it comes to despising Apple). Let's look at this a different way: no one has cracked this potential market yet (at least in the US, just nibbling at the edges)... what makes you think Apple can't make a good play?
- jusben1369 11y ago
  No disrespect but you didn't answer OP's question. Instead you went on with a bit of an advertisement about how great Apple is. Venmo has cracked this potential market (per the article they have great market share) I think Apple could build a tremendous P2P service based on your comments. But it's never going to be the platform lock in they desire because if we really do have meaningful broad adoption of P2P only cross platform offerings will work.
  - MBCook 11y ago
    I saw his question as 'why would I want an iPhone only service', so that's what I answered. Venmo may have great market share among people using apps to pay friends. I'm suggesting the total pool of people is MUCH bigger and Apple could take a good chunk of those people, not unlike when the smartphone, tablet, MP3 player, or digital music store markets got MUCH bigger. Will they take it all? No. Probably not even 'most'. But there is still a large opportunity there. I've never used Venmo, but I wonder if they'll survive or end up a player that was there too soon or at the start but is overtaken by the 2nd wave. There are plenty of companies/brands that fit that model. Diamond Rio, Palm, ICQ, Blackberry... Or maybe the banks will come in and crush this market somehow. I know many are trying (BoA, Chase, USAA), but they may not get the UX to work well or be willing to cooperate between banks.
  - 11y ago
ruddct 11y ago
iMessage doesn't require you to figure out if the other user has an iPhone. Do an OS update and all of a sudden messages just start turning blue for some people (along with other UX bonuses that are superior to the vanilla SMS experience) I would imagine that a consumer-to-consumer Apple Pay would work similarly. Hell, it might be integrated directly in the messages app.
- jusben1369 11y ago
  The problem is texting was around way before the iPhone. So it wasn't an opportunity for Apple to create greater stickiness for iOS vs other operating systems. Apple could create a P2P offering that worked easily with non iOS phones. But that would appear to defeat the stated purpose of building such a service. Or at least significantly reduce it.
braythwayt 11y ago
I want to give my children their allowance? Or transfer money back and forth with my partner?
- nicolewhite 11y ago
  You can do this easily with Square Cash and Venmo already.
  - admiralpumpkin 11y ago
    As someone who has used both extensively, they both could use improvement. Venmo is a holding service, requiring an extra step to actually get your money. Square Cash, while easy and directly person-to-person, is slow. Fix either of these issues and I'll convert.
  - braythwayt 11y ago
    Yes, but you asked about scenarios where I am pretty sure the other party has an iDevice. I am not in any way saying that Apple's solution would be superior to existing solutions. Speaking as a Canadian, I can already use email to transfer money to almost any other Canadian, because our cartel of banks use a common system.

With all the available options why would you want to use a service that requires you to figure out if the other person uses an iPhone?

by guelo 11y ago

With all the available options why would you want to use a service that requires you to figure out if the other person uses an iPhone?

feld 11y ago

Who said it would be iPhone-only?

finnn 11y ago
Everything Apple has ever done historically (with mobile) has been iOS-only, what possible reason would there be to suspect this would be any different?
- Alupis 11y ago
  And given the number of Android devices in the wild far, far surpasses the number of iOS devices... using this service seems like more of a hassle than not.
  - codyb 11y ago
    In NYC, iPhone users seem pretty heavily concentrated in Manhattan. This means certain groups of people are probably hanging out in nearly entirely iPhone user enclaves. [0] [0] - http://www.businessinsider.com/android-is-for-poor-people-maps-2014-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/android-is-for-poor-people-ma...
    - jolipparcreek 11y ago
      That article was very misleading[1] and I wonder why[2] people keep citing it… [1] here's a deconstruction of the data in the article: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158143/twitter-heat-map-shows-iphone-use-by-the-affluent-android-by-the-poor/40#post_2349718 http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/158143/twitter-heat-map-sho... [2] here's one explanation why: http://readwrite.com/2013/01/29/why-do-americans-hate-android-and-love-apple http://readwrite.com/2013/01/29/why-do-americans-hate-androi...
      - codyb 11y ago
        Hadn't seen that, thanks for the correction. Makes a lot of sense.
  - matthewmacleod 11y ago
    And given the number of Android devices in the wild far, far surpasses the number of iOS devices That's obviously true globally, but not for some of their more important markets. iOS and Android are roughly equivalent in the US for example, with the latter having maybe 10% more of the market – I think? While there's no doubt that instant money transfers are particularly useful in less developed markets, it's not like it wouldn't still be a useful service in the US.
    - Vraxx 11y ago
      One of the key differences here (for me at least) between an apple only app (assuming that is the case) and something like square cash is that if the person I want to send money to doesn't have an iPhone, I wouldn't be able to send them money, whereas if they don't have square cash I can tell them to download it and then send them money and with the current promotion, even get $5 for referring them.
      - matthewmacleod 11y ago
        Absolutely true - but i imagine the conversation is: "I want to send you money. Do you have an iPhone?" "Yes" "Okay, here's the money." versus "Do you have an iPhone?" "No" "Okay, download SquareVenmoPal and I'll send it to you". There's a built-in audience for Apple Pay that might prove to be beneficial.
        Vraxx 11y ago
        Fair, my thought process always seems to conclude that having multiple apps is a downside, but that argument really doesn't hold up well once I consciously think about that fact.
- BillinghamJ 11y ago
  Perhaps Apple Music (launched on Android today) is a sign of changing times?
  - MBCook 11y ago
    I doubt it. I think Apple Music is a trojan horse (much like the original iPod) to get people using their music service. They MAY release the payment stuff for Android (so users can receive payments) but I doubt they want to be a general payment provider for Android users.
    - ap3 11y ago
      What about android users that already have iTunes accounts via the Apple Music trojan horse ?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- ians 11y ago
  Not mobile but iTunes made it to Windows and now Apple Music is available on Android. It wouldn't be a first.
- LeoPanthera 11y ago
  Apple Music just launched on Android.
- feld 11y ago
  Don't Apple Pay and Android Pay operate almost identically now? The original Google Wallet/Pay implementation which I used years ago via NFC was different. I don't believe the Android Pay name change is just branding.
  - MBCook 11y ago
    I think Android Pay is like Apple Pay and Google Wallet is still available as a 'virtual' credit card that can be used with Android Pay.

matthewmacleod 11y ago

Well, do bear in mind that the iPhone is pretty popular – so you've probably got a decent chance of wanting to transfer money to someone with a compatible device – maybe 25% or so? Knowing Apple's UX, it'll be rather easy-to-use if it's available – so I'm not sure that the overhead of 'figuring out if the other person uses an iPhone' would be any higher than figuring out if they use Venmo or PayPal or Square or whatever the other options are.

Alupis 11y ago
> Knowing Apple's UX, it'll be rather easy-to-use How can we assume this? This exact thing has been tried many, many times - and sometimes to great success. What inherently makes you believe Apple's spin will be so much better than the other services and their unique problems? The challenge Apple will face has nothing to do with UX - it will have to do with userbase. It's likely (although not absolute) that using this service will require an iOS device. Given Android devices far outnumber iOS devices, this may pose a problem. Other services like PayPal and Square are universal services (device agnostic), and accounts are free (compared to Apple's barrier to entry which will likely cost you an iOS device).
- matthewmacleod 11y ago
  How can we assume this? Obviously we can't know for sure – but it does seem like a pretty safe assumption. Apple Pay is a good experience at the moment; it's easy to see how that experience could be extended to inter-device transfers (bring them close together, enter the amount to transfer, Touch ID and done – or something similar). The challenge Apple will face has nothing to do with UX - it will have to do with user base. The service will likely be available instantly to literally tens of millions of people with no additional effort on their part, as soon as Apple roll out a software update. That's a big benefit for Apple. It's likely (although not absolute) that using this service will require an iOS device. Given Android devices far outnumber iOS devices, this may pose a problem. I think I responded to this elsewhere, but that's only true globally. Bear in mind that even Apple Pay is only available in the US and the UK at the moment; iOS share in those countries is around 40%. Other services like PayPal and Square are universal services (device agnostic), and accounts are free (compared to Apple's barrier to entry which will likely cost you an iOS device). They do have the additional barrier of not being available to all users by default, though.

MBCook 11y ago

My whole family and many of my friends use iPhones. iPhones are extremely secure thanks to TouchID and Apple's software. Apple already has payment info for me and a good relationship with banks. They're normally pretty great at UI and can integrate it into the OS in ways no 3rd party ever could. It will be built into the phone and come preinstalled so I don't have to convince people to install it. Apple shows a lot more respect for my privacy than other companies that I could see doing this (such as Facebook/Google) and isn't a company I already despise (PayPal, YMMV when it comes to despising Apple). Let's look at this a different way: no one has cracked this potential market yet (at least in the US, just nibbling at the edges)... what makes you think Apple can't make a good play?

jusben1369 11y ago
No disrespect but you didn't answer OP's question. Instead you went on with a bit of an advertisement about how great Apple is. Venmo has cracked this potential market (per the article they have great market share) I think Apple could build a tremendous P2P service based on your comments. But it's never going to be the platform lock in they desire because if we really do have meaningful broad adoption of P2P only cross platform offerings will work.
- MBCook 11y ago
  I saw his question as 'why would I want an iPhone only service', so that's what I answered. Venmo may have great market share among people using apps to pay friends. I'm suggesting the total pool of people is MUCH bigger and Apple could take a good chunk of those people, not unlike when the smartphone, tablet, MP3 player, or digital music store markets got MUCH bigger. Will they take it all? No. Probably not even 'most'. But there is still a large opportunity there. I've never used Venmo, but I wonder if they'll survive or end up a player that was there too soon or at the start but is overtaken by the 2nd wave. There are plenty of companies/brands that fit that model. Diamond Rio, Palm, ICQ, Blackberry... Or maybe the banks will come in and crush this market somehow. I know many are trying (BoA, Chase, USAA), but they may not get the UX to work well or be willing to cooperate between banks.
- 11y ago

ruddct 11y ago

iMessage doesn't require you to figure out if the other user has an iPhone. Do an OS update and all of a sudden messages just start turning blue for some people (along with other UX bonuses that are superior to the vanilla SMS experience) I would imagine that a consumer-to-consumer Apple Pay would work similarly. Hell, it might be integrated directly in the messages app.

jusben1369 11y ago
The problem is texting was around way before the iPhone. So it wasn't an opportunity for Apple to create greater stickiness for iOS vs other operating systems. Apple could create a P2P offering that worked easily with non iOS phones. But that would appear to defeat the stated purpose of building such a service. Or at least significantly reduce it.

braythwayt 11y ago

I want to give my children their allowance? Or transfer money back and forth with my partner?

nicolewhite 11y ago
You can do this easily with Square Cash and Venmo already.
- admiralpumpkin 11y ago
  As someone who has used both extensively, they both could use improvement. Venmo is a holding service, requiring an extra step to actually get your money. Square Cash, while easy and directly person-to-person, is slow. Fix either of these issues and I'll convert.
- braythwayt 11y ago
  Yes, but you asked about scenarios where I am pretty sure the other party has an iDevice. I am not in any way saying that Apple's solution would be superior to existing solutions. Speaking as a Canadian, I can already use email to transfer money to almost any other Canadian, because our cartel of banks use a common system.