> (1) regular taxis could not be summoned via an app or web page, instead requiring a phone call or curbside hailing This is partially true. It wasn't just tha

> (1) regular taxis could not be summoned via an app or web page, instead requiring a phone call or curbside hailing This is partially true. It wasn't just that taxis couldn't be summoned through an app. It was that when you tried to summon one, there was at best even odds of one showing up within 30 minutes. Drivers could and did take curbside hails as they saw fit, and a dispatch often seemed to amount to no more than a polite request. I've used taxis apps in the years since Uber's debut. Replacing a phonecall that gets ignored with an app's request that gets ignored is not an improvement. > (2) their credit card terminals were often broken so that you had to pay cash. They essentially never were. Cabbies just prefer cash. The real issue here is that cabbies had no compunction about lying through their teeth and there were no consequences for this. The whole system was set up so that there was in-theory accountability but no in-reality accountability. Uber took this away entirely by forcing payment to be handled entirely via the app. > That should be good enough to make them a viable alternative to Uber/Lyft for probably 95% or more of the rides in a US city. With the above points in mind, things take on a slightly different character. Using Square accomplishes nothing except giving cabbies a slightly different thing to lie about. Without the assurance that your driver won't make random other stops or otherwise not show in a reasonable timeframe, the request app isn't that useful.