3 ms·

I've seen the mess that banking apps on Android made. Not supporting certain phone models despite having NFC, needing a special SIM-card for the secure element,

I've seen the mess that banking apps on Android made. Not supporting certain phone models despite having NFC, needing a special SIM-card for the secure element, horrible UX. Multi-bank support meant switching between apps before payment. It's better now but far from perfect. The benefit of the Apple Wallet for customers is having all your cards in one app, available from the lock screen. The benefit to the bank is that they don't have to make an app, they just need the back-end integration with Apple Pay.

jeroenhd 7y ago
Of course some banks are shit. In some countries you can't log in to your bank without ActiveX. Most banks I've seen (in Europe, at least) are quite with the times and support basically any device with NFC. For Apple this is especially easy because there's only 6 models of phone to support with a single API. There's no way a bank app would drop support on a maintained iOS device. In my country, every bank has supported contactless payments for at least 3-4 years. My bank has a pretty nice UX, as do many of its competitors. Some other apps are more focused on security than user experience, which manifests itself in an irritating slow mess, but that's just another factor to take into account when picking a bank. A few months ago, the first bank in my country announced Apple pay support. Up till then, Apple customers have been behind the curve on simple features that even the cheapest Chinese phone had. Now that banks started supporting Apple Pay, every single customer, including me, is paying Apple for the extra fees that banks need to pay to Apple for integration (because they're not allowed to charge Apple customers directly). I don't have any Apple decides whatsoever and so do most households I know of, yet we're all funding Apple's little money making scheme. The benefit of Apple wallet is the same as the benefit for Google Pay and people still use that despite bank apps existing on Android. If Apple Pay is better, customers wouldn't install separate bank apps and banks still wouldn't have to make apps. The result: customers have more choice, but now the responsibility for not bringing features to users lies with the bank instead of Apple. The real difference here is that Apple doesn't allow banks to compete on iOS devices because Apple wants a portion of all payments their customers make on their phones. No matter how fancy Apple's solution is, there's no excusing their anticompetitive restrictions on their app store from a consumer standpoint. The only defences I can think of are "I don't use bank apps so I don't care", "I don't trust my bank to make software but I don't care enough to switch" or "It's technically not illegal in most countries", all of which are pretty bad excuses in my opinion.
- systemtest 7y ago
  6 models? From the Apple website: * All iPhones with Face ID (23 models) * All iPhones with Touch ID, except for iPhone 5s (33 models) * iPad Pro (18), iPad Air (6), iPad (7), and iPad mini (8) models with Touch ID or Face ID * Apple Watch Series 1 and 2 and later (20 models) * Apple Watch (1st generation) (3 models) * Mac models with Touch ID * Mac models introduced in 2012 or later with an Apple Pay-enabled iPhone or Apple Watch I count 118 SKUs just for mobile devices. That is without the difference in storage capacity. And then you have all the country specific stuff. For Japan you need an iPhone 8 or later or the Apple Watch Series 3 or later. The iPhone 7, 7 plus or Apple Watch Series 2 work but only if purchased in Japan. In the Netherlands you can use Apple Pay on the web only on a compatible iPhone or iPad.
kitsunesoba 7y ago
Yes, if this results in one of my banks/card issuers dropping Apple Pay in favor of their own app, I’m going to be switching banks/cards. I have zero patience for companies that try to corral me into whatever their custom solution is. They have to either work with the system standard stuff or lose my business entirely.
imtringued 7y ago
>The benefit of the Apple Wallet for customers is having all your cards in one app, available from the lock screen. The benefit to the bank is that they don't have to make an app, they just need the back-end integration with Apple Pay. I don't understand this. If you can just add a credit card or a bank account via direct debit then why does Apple Pay require cooperation from banks at all? The primary reason why those banks want their own app is because Apple doesn't want to integrate them into Apple Pay.
- jaywalk 7y ago
  How exactly could Apple Pay work without the bank's cooperation?
- hwbehrens 7y ago
  There are additional privacy layers in the system, such that every time you make a purchase, a temporary card number is generated and used, rather than your actual card number. This is beneficial as it prevents the retailer from tracking your purchases, but requires interactive participation from the bank, which needs to map that number to your actual card number in real time. As part of the onboarding process when you enroll a card, your bank must confirm the enrollment to ensure this process can take place. It seems to be part of a multi-step key exchange mechanism [0] mediated by Apple but stored locally at either end, ensuring that Apple does not retain your card details at any step of the process. Of course, without bank participation, there aren't two parties to actually mediate between. [0]: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203027 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203027
  - mercutio2 7y ago
    “Every time you make a purchase, a temporary card number is generated and used” This is a common misconception. Every device receives a unique DAN, but when multiple transactions happen across time using the same device, the merchant will receive the same DAN. This allows individual devices to easily be invalidated by the issuer, but it doesn’t really provide much privacy benefit from, say, merchants aggregating personal information based on your purchasing patterns.

jeroenhd 7y ago

Of course some banks are shit. In some countries you can't log in to your bank without ActiveX. Most banks I've seen (in Europe, at least) are quite with the times and support basically any device with NFC. For Apple this is especially easy because there's only 6 models of phone to support with a single API. There's no way a bank app would drop support on a maintained iOS device. In my country, every bank has supported contactless payments for at least 3-4 years. My bank has a pretty nice UX, as do many of its competitors. Some other apps are more focused on security than user experience, which manifests itself in an irritating slow mess, but that's just another factor to take into account when picking a bank. A few months ago, the first bank in my country announced Apple pay support. Up till then, Apple customers have been behind the curve on simple features that even the cheapest Chinese phone had. Now that banks started supporting Apple Pay, every single customer, including me, is paying Apple for the extra fees that banks need to pay to Apple for integration (because they're not allowed to charge Apple customers directly). I don't have any Apple decides whatsoever and so do most households I know of, yet we're all funding Apple's little money making scheme. The benefit of Apple wallet is the same as the benefit for Google Pay and people still use that despite bank apps existing on Android. If Apple Pay is better, customers wouldn't install separate bank apps and banks still wouldn't have to make apps. The result: customers have more choice, but now the responsibility for not bringing features to users lies with the bank instead of Apple. The real difference here is that Apple doesn't allow banks to compete on iOS devices because Apple wants a portion of all payments their customers make on their phones. No matter how fancy Apple's solution is, there's no excusing their anticompetitive restrictions on their app store from a consumer standpoint. The only defences I can think of are "I don't use bank apps so I don't care", "I don't trust my bank to make software but I don't care enough to switch" or "It's technically not illegal in most countries", all of which are pretty bad excuses in my opinion.

systemtest 7y ago
6 models? From the Apple website: * All iPhones with Face ID (23 models) * All iPhones with Touch ID, except for iPhone 5s (33 models) * iPad Pro (18), iPad Air (6), iPad (7), and iPad mini (8) models with Touch ID or Face ID * Apple Watch Series 1 and 2 and later (20 models) * Apple Watch (1st generation) (3 models) * Mac models with Touch ID * Mac models introduced in 2012 or later with an Apple Pay-enabled iPhone or Apple Watch I count 118 SKUs just for mobile devices. That is without the difference in storage capacity. And then you have all the country specific stuff. For Japan you need an iPhone 8 or later or the Apple Watch Series 3 or later. The iPhone 7, 7 plus or Apple Watch Series 2 work but only if purchased in Japan. In the Netherlands you can use Apple Pay on the web only on a compatible iPhone or iPad.

kitsunesoba 7y ago

Yes, if this results in one of my banks/card issuers dropping Apple Pay in favor of their own app, I’m going to be switching banks/cards. I have zero patience for companies that try to corral me into whatever their custom solution is. They have to either work with the system standard stuff or lose my business entirely.

imtringued 7y ago

>The benefit of the Apple Wallet for customers is having all your cards in one app, available from the lock screen. The benefit to the bank is that they don't have to make an app, they just need the back-end integration with Apple Pay. I don't understand this. If you can just add a credit card or a bank account via direct debit then why does Apple Pay require cooperation from banks at all? The primary reason why those banks want their own app is because Apple doesn't want to integrate them into Apple Pay.

jaywalk 7y ago
How exactly could Apple Pay work without the bank's cooperation?
hwbehrens 7y ago
There are additional privacy layers in the system, such that every time you make a purchase, a temporary card number is generated and used, rather than your actual card number. This is beneficial as it prevents the retailer from tracking your purchases, but requires interactive participation from the bank, which needs to map that number to your actual card number in real time. As part of the onboarding process when you enroll a card, your bank must confirm the enrollment to ensure this process can take place. It seems to be part of a multi-step key exchange mechanism [0] mediated by Apple but stored locally at either end, ensuring that Apple does not retain your card details at any step of the process. Of course, without bank participation, there aren't two parties to actually mediate between. [0]: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203027 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203027
- mercutio2 7y ago
  “Every time you make a purchase, a temporary card number is generated and used” This is a common misconception. Every device receives a unique DAN, but when multiple transactions happen across time using the same device, the merchant will receive the same DAN. This allows individual devices to easily be invalidated by the issuer, but it doesn’t really provide much privacy benefit from, say, merchants aggregating personal information based on your purchasing patterns.