6 ms·

>they will not enable a feature only for Android users Can I ask why not? Seems a shame to leave such a large user base on the table.

GekkePrutser 5y ago
There aren't any good Android watches really. Perhaps this will change with Google and Samsung pairing up but right now as Android user you're pretty much out of luck
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  I thought parent meant payment via android phones. Is there a difference between that and watches? NFC (Google pay) should work the same across the Android ecosystem, no?
- smoldesu 5y ago
  I dunno, I bought a cheap-o Fossil watch a couple years ago on a whim, and I actually ended up using the Google Pay feature most of all. Being able to leave my phone and wallet in my backpack while I pay for coffee felt like a whole new level of real-life Disneyland.
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    I had a Galaxy Watch Active with Samsung Pay for a while and I have to agree. That is a great feature if it works. However, it didn't actually work very well. You have to do several button presses and taps on the phone, during which it launches very slowly, and once you get to the payment part it often failed for whatever reason. "Multiple cards detected", "payment denied", whatever. It was quicker to fish the card out of my wallet and much less stressful. PS: The card I paid with when it failed was the exact same card that I had linked to Samsung Pay, there were no balance issues :)
    - smoldesu 5y ago
      Android Pay (when I used it) was distinctly different. As long as it was unlocked (eg. hadn't been taken off your wrist) you could press a button to quick-launch the NFC payment app. Since I wasn't using the shortcuts for anything else, it worked quite well for me.
- ljm 5y ago
  There aren't any good Smart Watches, really. Apple aren't good smartwatch manufacturers when their smartwatches only know how to talk to other Apple devices and services (like HealthKit or whatever it's called) and actively prevent compatibility with other systems. I mean, that's just buying into Apple's hype. If their watch was so good, they'd make it talk through open standards and they wouldn't go for ecosystem lock-in: it would be good on its own merit. My Samsung Galaxy watch has had an EKG sensor for longer than it has taken for Apple to add their own. It's technologically superior, and also has a circular face instead of being a big square block, and has better battery life since I can get a good 2 days or more out of it. But ultimately it is also as bad as Apple because it only works well with Samsung's ecosystem.
  - thefounder 5y ago
    Apple sells more smartwatches so the market has a diff opinion than yours
    - cnst 5y ago
      But doesn't Android sell more devices overall? Does that imply Android is better?
  - HatchedLake721 5y ago
    Sorry but that’s a lousy argument. The whole point about Apple (for decades) is vertical integration, building hardware and software specifically optimized for the said hardware. That’s what Apple is in it’s core, that’s why they’ve been revolutionizing industries and that’s why iPhones, iPads and MacBooks are most performant and battery efficient consumer devices for years. It’s like saying - “There aren’t any good consoles really. Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo aren’t good console manufacturers when their consoles only know how to talk to other PlayStation/Xbox/Nintendo services and actively prevent compatibility with other systems.”
    - lostmsu 5y ago
      > Sorry but that’s a lousy argument. > MacBooks are most performant Huh? MacBooks have the same performance as corresponding Windows laptops. That only slightly changed with M1, but it doesn't seem anything to do with vertical integration, and rather just the result of buying out 5nm production. Also there is complete lack of models with Nvidia GPUs, so they are a lackluster in graphics.
pjerem 5y ago
Because then you have to explain why it works for them and not for you and that it’s not your fault, straight in your marketing.
- ChuckNorris89 5y ago
  Yeah but making money off ~55% of the mobile userbase seems better than 100% of nothing.
  - vineyardmike 5y ago
    Its a bank. People will pay and use money either way. Its a feature improvement, not an original feature. If they just avoid the headaches, they don't lose anything really.
  - Groxx 5y ago
    At the cost of reducing the opinion of your company for anyone who has problems. Whether or not that's a worthwhile tradeoff: I dunno! No doubt it depends on exact numbers, lifetime expected value, potential word-of-mouth damage, etc.
- m-p-3 5y ago
  Put a notice when setting up the app that because of Apple's limitation on NFC that the feature is unavailable.
sschueller 5y ago
I assume it is because at the moment the usability is identical across all devices and bank versions. Enabling a feature on a device and not on the other which has more users will cause support headaches.
- cnst 5y ago
  But then that's Apple issue. Simply refer the Apple fans back to Apple, or advise them to switch to Android.
  - sschueller 5y ago
    That doesn't work with Apple fans. They will blame you, never Apple. It has gotten better now but back then it was always your fault because Apple was the most innovative etc. etc. etc.
    - cnst 5y ago
      Good artists copy, great artists steal. Apple literally copied half of the Android long after stuff made it to Android. They've even copied Swype keyboard like 10 years later!
      - withinboredom 5y ago
        And Android copied windows phone. ;) Windows phone had some of the best power settings for a long time, turning into a dumb phone when the battery got low.
  - pornel 5y ago
    Apple rejects apps for explaining App Store guidelines to users or mentioning Android.
- m-p-3 5y ago
  Why stop implementing a feature because one of the vendor is arbitrarily limiting the hardware? Targetting the lowest common denominator isn't always the right move, especially if one platform is stagnating for their own benefit. Light up a fire under their feet, have the userbase put some pressure on Apple if they're unhappy about the situation.

GekkePrutser 5y ago

There aren't any good Android watches really. Perhaps this will change with Google and Samsung pairing up but right now as Android user you're pretty much out of luck

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
I thought parent meant payment via android phones. Is there a difference between that and watches? NFC (Google pay) should work the same across the Android ecosystem, no?
smoldesu 5y ago
I dunno, I bought a cheap-o Fossil watch a couple years ago on a whim, and I actually ended up using the Google Pay feature most of all. Being able to leave my phone and wallet in my backpack while I pay for coffee felt like a whole new level of real-life Disneyland.
- GekkePrutser 5y ago
  I had a Galaxy Watch Active with Samsung Pay for a while and I have to agree. That is a great feature if it works. However, it didn't actually work very well. You have to do several button presses and taps on the phone, during which it launches very slowly, and once you get to the payment part it often failed for whatever reason. "Multiple cards detected", "payment denied", whatever. It was quicker to fish the card out of my wallet and much less stressful. PS: The card I paid with when it failed was the exact same card that I had linked to Samsung Pay, there were no balance issues :)
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    Android Pay (when I used it) was distinctly different. As long as it was unlocked (eg. hadn't been taken off your wrist) you could press a button to quick-launch the NFC payment app. Since I wasn't using the shortcuts for anything else, it worked quite well for me.
ljm 5y ago
There aren't any good Smart Watches, really. Apple aren't good smartwatch manufacturers when their smartwatches only know how to talk to other Apple devices and services (like HealthKit or whatever it's called) and actively prevent compatibility with other systems. I mean, that's just buying into Apple's hype. If their watch was so good, they'd make it talk through open standards and they wouldn't go for ecosystem lock-in: it would be good on its own merit. My Samsung Galaxy watch has had an EKG sensor for longer than it has taken for Apple to add their own. It's technologically superior, and also has a circular face instead of being a big square block, and has better battery life since I can get a good 2 days or more out of it. But ultimately it is also as bad as Apple because it only works well with Samsung's ecosystem.
- thefounder 5y ago
  Apple sells more smartwatches so the market has a diff opinion than yours
  - cnst 5y ago
    But doesn't Android sell more devices overall? Does that imply Android is better?
- HatchedLake721 5y ago
  Sorry but that’s a lousy argument. The whole point about Apple (for decades) is vertical integration, building hardware and software specifically optimized for the said hardware. That’s what Apple is in it’s core, that’s why they’ve been revolutionizing industries and that’s why iPhones, iPads and MacBooks are most performant and battery efficient consumer devices for years. It’s like saying - “There aren’t any good consoles really. Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo aren’t good console manufacturers when their consoles only know how to talk to other PlayStation/Xbox/Nintendo services and actively prevent compatibility with other systems.”
  - lostmsu 5y ago
    > Sorry but that’s a lousy argument. > MacBooks are most performant Huh? MacBooks have the same performance as corresponding Windows laptops. That only slightly changed with M1, but it doesn't seem anything to do with vertical integration, and rather just the result of buying out 5nm production. Also there is complete lack of models with Nvidia GPUs, so they are a lackluster in graphics.

pjerem 5y ago

Because then you have to explain why it works for them and not for you and that it’s not your fault, straight in your marketing.

ChuckNorris89 5y ago
Yeah but making money off ~55% of the mobile userbase seems better than 100% of nothing.
- vineyardmike 5y ago
  Its a bank. People will pay and use money either way. Its a feature improvement, not an original feature. If they just avoid the headaches, they don't lose anything really.
- Groxx 5y ago
  At the cost of reducing the opinion of your company for anyone who has problems. Whether or not that's a worthwhile tradeoff: I dunno! No doubt it depends on exact numbers, lifetime expected value, potential word-of-mouth damage, etc.
m-p-3 5y ago
Put a notice when setting up the app that because of Apple's limitation on NFC that the feature is unavailable.

sschueller 5y ago

I assume it is because at the moment the usability is identical across all devices and bank versions. Enabling a feature on a device and not on the other which has more users will cause support headaches.

cnst 5y ago
But then that's Apple issue. Simply refer the Apple fans back to Apple, or advise them to switch to Android.
- sschueller 5y ago
  That doesn't work with Apple fans. They will blame you, never Apple. It has gotten better now but back then it was always your fault because Apple was the most innovative etc. etc. etc.
  - cnst 5y ago
    Good artists copy, great artists steal. Apple literally copied half of the Android long after stuff made it to Android. They've even copied Swype keyboard like 10 years later!
    - withinboredom 5y ago
      And Android copied windows phone. ;) Windows phone had some of the best power settings for a long time, turning into a dumb phone when the battery got low.
- pornel 5y ago
  Apple rejects apps for explaining App Store guidelines to users or mentioning Android.
m-p-3 5y ago
Why stop implementing a feature because one of the vendor is arbitrarily limiting the hardware? Targetting the lowest common denominator isn't always the right move, especially if one platform is stagnating for their own benefit. Light up a fire under their feet, have the userbase put some pressure on Apple if they're unhappy about the situation.