4 ms·

Anticompetitive goes both ways, though. Currently, on iOS, there is no NFC API at all; you might be able to accomplish something similar with iBeacon, but you

by comex 12y ago

Anticompetitive goes both ways, though. Currently, on iOS, there is no NFC API at all; you might be able to accomplish something similar with iBeacon, but you can't replicate Apple Pay's single-touch flow (AFAIK, you'd have to swipe the notification, fingerprint to unlock, and then fingerprint again to confirm payment once the app had launched). Now, Apple is not a monopoly, and admittedly this is all brand new - opening up the secure element would be an implementation challenge, and it's possible that a new extension point will be added for lockscreen NFC handling in a future version, although not adding it would be nothing out of the ordinary for Apple. But the net result, for the time being, is that the retailers' payment system looks essentially doomed from the outset, since it can't compete with Apple's system on Apple devices.

downandout 12y ago
Working by itself, Apple isn't being anti-competitive under US law. Anyone can be as exclusionary as they like on their own. Several of the largest retailers in the country working together to specifically block Apple Pay (and all other contactless payments), in favor of their own payment solution, is clearly anti-competitive behavior under US law.
- comex 12y ago
  True. I'm just saying that in a looser ordinary language sense of "anticompetitive", Apple by itself probably brings an amount of market share to bear comparable to these companies together - at least out of all US retailers supporting smartphone payments.
  - MBCook 12y ago
    > I'm just saying that in a looser ordinary language sense of "anticompetitive" I don't think that's a normal definition. "Today Hoover released their new anti-competitive vacuum". Why is it anti-competitive? "They didn't create a network of 3rd party bag manufacturers on day one." If they were going out of their way to prevent it (such as when Keurig or the printer companies added DRM to stop clones) that's one thing. Apple doesn't let you choose a different keyboard manufacturer when you buy a MacBook either. Is that anti-competitive? Amazon's Kindle cases don't work with Nook tablets. Is that anti-competitive? I think you're reaching here.
- gizmo686 12y ago
  >Anyone can be as exclusionary as they like on their own. This isn't true once you get into monopoly territory, although that is not a concern in this case.

by comex 12y ago

downandout 12y ago

Working by itself, Apple isn't being anti-competitive under US law. Anyone can be as exclusionary as they like on their own. Several of the largest retailers in the country working together to specifically block Apple Pay (and all other contactless payments), in favor of their own payment solution, is clearly anti-competitive behavior under US law.

comex 12y ago
True. I'm just saying that in a looser ordinary language sense of "anticompetitive", Apple by itself probably brings an amount of market share to bear comparable to these companies together - at least out of all US retailers supporting smartphone payments.
- MBCook 12y ago
  > I'm just saying that in a looser ordinary language sense of "anticompetitive" I don't think that's a normal definition. "Today Hoover released their new anti-competitive vacuum". Why is it anti-competitive? "They didn't create a network of 3rd party bag manufacturers on day one." If they were going out of their way to prevent it (such as when Keurig or the printer companies added DRM to stop clones) that's one thing. Apple doesn't let you choose a different keyboard manufacturer when you buy a MacBook either. Is that anti-competitive? Amazon's Kindle cases don't work with Nook tablets. Is that anti-competitive? I think you're reaching here.
gizmo686 12y ago
>Anyone can be as exclusionary as they like on their own. This isn't true once you get into monopoly territory, although that is not a concern in this case.