Holding the government of each state accountable for the information, managing and handle of everyones ID is the responsible way, no private company must manage and hold this kind of information by itself. Well done apple!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Imposing Strict Terms on U.S. States for Digital IDs in Wallet App
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, I guess we won’t be seeing this feature for a while.
Anyone who has worked in state government knows this is a good thing. I'm surprised at all the complaints. As another user stated, the states need to be responsible for managing their own data and it should be strict so not anyone can just up and put in IDs.
The article is annoying with the whole tired "the tax payers foot the bill hur-durr" nonsense. The money will come out of a predetermined budget, your taxes aren't going up just because this gets implemented, and with the size of state budgets this is going to be less than a drop in the bucket cost wise.
The article is annoying with the whole tired "the tax payers foot the bill hur-durr" nonsense. The money will come out of a predetermined budget, your taxes aren't going up just because this gets implemented, and with the size of state budgets this is going to be less than a drop in the bucket cost wise.
Something is coming to Ontario by end of year and if the covid passport is any indication I believe we will be getting Wallet support for our ID
This whole feature is benefiting Apple. Why are they adding those restrictions? Intead, it should be from the States who are the governing body of the cards issued by them.
It is benefiting states and their citizens. Since it involves Apple phones, I see no problem Apple setting standards for security.
Why would a state invest time and money to implement a service that will only serve 50% (ish) of their constituents. There needs to be a virtual ID standard set that iOS and Android should conform to. Not the other way around IMO.
In Colorado we have the my Colorado app that already contains a widely accepted digital ID. Although not as convenient as storing in the wallet, it does what I need it to do.
Shame on those states that have signed up. Apple subcontracting the cost of improving their wallet experience to the taxpayer is so typically Tim.
Imagine being a Georgia taxpayer who owns an Android phone and yet has to subsidise Apple’s tech? I’d be voting out whoever signed the agreement.
Imagine being a Georgia taxpayer who owns an Android phone and yet has to subsidise Apple’s tech? I’d be voting out whoever signed the agreement.
This will perhaps be an unpopular perspective, but If you actually read the text carefully, and then propose to yourself what the opposite would be, you wouldn’t want the opposite. This isn’t Apple “setting a standard” (see below; Apple is using an ISO standard, not their own), and this isn’t Apple taking control over state infrastructure (which I imagine nobody would want).
Apple is, as someone pointed out above, making the wallet. They’re simply informing states of the work that goes into producing the actual ID that goes into the wallet, and making it clear Apple won’t help them in doing so. States are free to use the same digital ID on non-Apple devices (again, it’s an ISO standard), and they should do so only if they feel it benefits them and their taxpayers. If they don’t… fine.
A specific point:
This is actually a good thing. Ever seen the TV shows where you get a “free $10000 renovation” and it‘s done slipshod? Having the states own the finances means the states have control over the implementation. They can implement it in a way that facilitates cross-platform compatibility, for example. Ultimately, this doesn’t “benefit Apple,” in that Apple sees no incremental revenue for this feature; it “benefits taxpayers,” who’ll need to foot the bill. If a given state’s taxpayers don’t want the bill or the benefit, cool, their state doesn’t need to do it.
This won’t stay an iOS-only feature; there’s zero chance any government who stands up this infrastructure won’t deploy it as widely as possible. Android may not offer something similar today, but what Apple’s doing is based on a set of open standards—Google can add this into Android anytime they want.
The actual text doesn’t preclude states from offering this to non-Apple devices; it says that Apple will determine which Apple devices Apple supports digital IDs on.
Again, you’d want this. You don’t want someone else doing it.
Again… I’d think this is how you’d want it. “Apple‘s requirements” being, in this case, the standards that Apple has adopted and is using. You surely wouldn’t want Apple verifying IDs Or doing QA on the systems.
Yeah, I mean, maybe this is a bit much, but I can’t imagine states spending the money and not marketing it. Nevada DMV launched a mobile phone reservation service (which works quite well) and they’ve probably spent more marketing it than they did developing it, to get people to use it.
I kind of assume you’d want this if you were going to invest in a digital ID program. Maybe instead of seeing this as “Apple being restrictive,” you can choose to see it as, “Apple saying, ‘hey, only do this if you’re going to be serious about it, otherwise don’t bother.’”
And from above…
Poland is a single country; the 50 US states are much like individual countries in this regard. You cannot view the US as a “country” in many aspects—the Federal government, in some regards (including IDs) acts more as an EU. For example, the Federal government has guidelines on IDs like driver’s licenses, which states can choose to follow or not. For example, in Nevada it is entirely possible to get a Federally approved “Real ID” as well as a non-Real ID. Coordinating ID activities across 50 states is a huge lift.
Also from above…
They did, in the US. It’s called “Real ID.” And it still hasn’t been fully adopted. The Federal government is abysmal at coming up with standards, let alone technological ones. Apple is building these off digital ID standards that Apple itself does not own (although it participates in the working groups):
”ISO” is the International Standards Organization; Apple is not creating the standard, here.
And finally..
Having worked on a number of Federal technology projects, I can pretty much assure you this is the very last thing you want. But again, the standard here is not Apple’s. It’s an open spec from ISO. Google has participated in that same standard, just as Apple has.
You might consider the perspective of, “Hey, Apple will make this possible for you, but if you and your taxpayers want it, you’re going to have to pay for it. If you’re going to use our trademarks in your marketing, we want to review that. If you’re going to do this, you might as well promise to market it. Apple’s going to invest something in this [otherwise we wouldn’t need to be sending you inquiries to help get it working] but we want you to own this.”
Legal terminology can sometimes make things seem more evil than they actually are. That’s because legalese isn’t pure English; it’s a set of phrases that have been honed over time to help ensure everyone understands what they’re agreeing to. So just maybe consider that what Apple’s set up is perhaps mostly in the taxpayers’ best interests. They’re using an open standard, they’re forcing states to own the infrastructure and ID data, and they’re not letting states dash this off quickly or without careful planning. I’m surprised anyone would want something different.
Apple is, as someone pointed out above, making the wallet. They’re simply informing states of the work that goes into producing the actual ID that goes into the wallet, and making it clear Apple won’t help them in doing so. States are free to use the same digital ID on non-Apple devices (again, it’s an ISO standard), and they should do so only if they feel it benefits them and their taxpayers. If they don’t… fine.
A specific point:
This is actually a good thing. Ever seen the TV shows where you get a “free $10000 renovation” and it‘s done slipshod? Having the states own the finances means the states have control over the implementation. They can implement it in a way that facilitates cross-platform compatibility, for example. Ultimately, this doesn’t “benefit Apple,” in that Apple sees no incremental revenue for this feature; it “benefits taxpayers,” who’ll need to foot the bill. If a given state’s taxpayers don’t want the bill or the benefit, cool, their state doesn’t need to do it.
This won’t stay an iOS-only feature; there’s zero chance any government who stands up this infrastructure won’t deploy it as widely as possible. Android may not offer something similar today, but what Apple’s doing is based on a set of open standards—Google can add this into Android anytime they want.
The actual text doesn’t preclude states from offering this to non-Apple devices; it says that Apple will determine which Apple devices Apple supports digital IDs on.
Again, you’d want this. You don’t want someone else doing it.
Again… I’d think this is how you’d want it. “Apple‘s requirements” being, in this case, the standards that Apple has adopted and is using. You surely wouldn’t want Apple verifying IDs Or doing QA on the systems.
Yeah, I mean, maybe this is a bit much, but I can’t imagine states spending the money and not marketing it. Nevada DMV launched a mobile phone reservation service (which works quite well) and they’ve probably spent more marketing it than they did developing it, to get people to use it.
I kind of assume you’d want this if you were going to invest in a digital ID program. Maybe instead of seeing this as “Apple being restrictive,” you can choose to see it as, “Apple saying, ‘hey, only do this if you’re going to be serious about it, otherwise don’t bother.’”
And from above…
Poland is a single country; the 50 US states are much like individual countries in this regard. You cannot view the US as a “country” in many aspects—the Federal government, in some regards (including IDs) acts more as an EU. For example, the Federal government has guidelines on IDs like driver’s licenses, which states can choose to follow or not. For example, in Nevada it is entirely possible to get a Federally approved “Real ID” as well as a non-Real ID. Coordinating ID activities across 50 states is a huge lift.
Also from above…
They did, in the US. It’s called “Real ID.” And it still hasn’t been fully adopted. The Federal government is abysmal at coming up with standards, let alone technological ones. Apple is building these off digital ID standards that Apple itself does not own (although it participates in the working groups):
”ISO” is the International Standards Organization; Apple is not creating the standard, here.
And finally..
Having worked on a number of Federal technology projects, I can pretty much assure you this is the very last thing you want. But again, the standard here is not Apple’s. It’s an open spec from ISO. Google has participated in that same standard, just as Apple has.
You might consider the perspective of, “Hey, Apple will make this possible for you, but if you and your taxpayers want it, you’re going to have to pay for it. If you’re going to use our trademarks in your marketing, we want to review that. If you’re going to do this, you might as well promise to market it. Apple’s going to invest something in this [otherwise we wouldn’t need to be sending you inquiries to help get it working] but we want you to own this.”
Legal terminology can sometimes make things seem more evil than they actually are. That’s because legalese isn’t pure English; it’s a set of phrases that have been honed over time to help ensure everyone understands what they’re agreeing to. So just maybe consider that what Apple’s set up is perhaps mostly in the taxpayers’ best interests. They’re using an open standard, they’re forcing states to own the infrastructure and ID data, and they’re not letting states dash this off quickly or without careful planning. I’m surprised anyone would want something different.
You might wait a hot minute and see if what GA produces is, in fact, cross-platform. Google has been involved in the ISO spec as well.
Many states sell their driving license lists to private companies.
The article definitely has an anti-Apple bias. This is no different than any software/platform company stating the requirements the customer needs to have in place to be successful with the product.
I work on a platform where they have very similar requirements, down to the type of positions you have to hire for, if you want to use the product. It’s to protect you and them. You, the states in this case, are set up for success. Then, Apple in this case, isn’t dealing with a customer that didn’t RTFM and is now failing and badmouthing the platform.
It’s really easy to take this and turn it into “Apple mandated!” but nobody is forcing the stated to participate. Besides, the infrastructure they are building and hiring will work for all digital ID platforms once there are any.
I work on a platform where they have very similar requirements, down to the type of positions you have to hire for, if you want to use the product. It’s to protect you and them. You, the states in this case, are set up for success. Then, Apple in this case, isn’t dealing with a customer that didn’t RTFM and is now failing and badmouthing the platform.
It’s really easy to take this and turn it into “Apple mandated!” but nobody is forcing the stated to participate. Besides, the infrastructure they are building and hiring will work for all digital ID platforms once there are any.
Not only that, they require that the states pay for everything with taxpayer money. That’s questionable for a state to do, since they’d be spending tax money on something that would only benefit half of the population.
I don't understand the question... We're talking about digitizing driver's licenses... already a government document. Why would Apple need to provide any government with documents they already have?
Yeah that’s fair. What’s not very fair is to also have the government of each state pay for everything with taxpayer money. Why soend taxpayer money on something that only benefits half the people? I doubt many states will go for this.
Thank you for having a level head, for actually reading the details, and for not just spewing out a knee-jerk reaction. We need more like you in this forum.
It’s not because taxes would go up. The complaints are there because money is being spent on something that will only benefit half of the population, the half who own iphones. Also why do states have to pay when apple has a lot more money, it’s loaded (I doubt any single state has $2 trillion).
Why? It seems like it's so convenient and it eliminates the need to take out/carry another card. I hope CA implements this in the future.
Only half of their citizens. And that makes it questionable for a state to spend money in that.
Yeah, this is just a sensationalist article with no 'proof' of what is being reported. Just hearsay. Each state needs to be responsible for their own residents info and setup some type of system for digital ID's and their protection, I guess? Florida has said we are getting digital ID's this month (which I'll believe it, when I see it), and they are working with Apple to implement it in the wallet (again, I'll believe it, when I see it). This is going to be one of those slow, slow moving technologies, because it's going to be politicized into: the tech company's are running your life and taking away your 'freedom', or Apple is going to sell your info to China BS as usual. Florida state law says you still have to have your physical driver's license with you, so it will not be something most people are not even going to try for a long, long time. Just my two cents.
Whoa. Interested to see how adoption rates play out. Asking states to add head count and other processes seems laughable, if not DOA. I would think Apple would make it as simple as possible for states to get on board. But it’s Apple, so who knows.
Especially not outside the US. In other countries, the governments are too sensitive about their national sovereignty and won’t let americans have any participation at all in issuing an official ID document.