You might need to rephrase that as ApplePay is universally* usable for ANZ users; anywhere that has PayWave.
*Can't use it at the cash only Fish and Chip shop but that's the only place I haven't been able to use it.
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 Says Australian Banks' Apple Pay Challenge Harms Consumers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You might need to rephrase that as ApplePay is universally* usable for ANZ users; anywhere that has PayWave.
*Can't use it at the cash only Fish and Chip shop but that's the only place I haven't been able to use it.
Sign up with ANZ or AMEX and you will be able to.
It's really up to you, you can Vote with your wallet and with your feet.
Yes, really. That is all completely false and has no basis in fact. All of those things could be sorted by a private maket at efficiencies orders of magnitude greater than that of any kind government.
Business behavior becomes harmful? Businesses exist to make money on profits from customers. If they have no customers, they make no money. Monopolies can only ever exist through government force. So the evil corporate business practices that you're railing against are created by the government in the first place.
Should I assume youre a big government liberal because of the assumption you've made about me?
Republicans are just one side of the same foolish coin. This whole idea that the government is the solution to all our problems or any problems for that matter is completely devoid of any basis in reality.
As a matter of fact, I would like to do away with all those things. They grant special government enforced "privileges" - read rights - to certain businesses. They're enforced monopolies, create market distortion in the name of protecting the public, which is a complete lie, and do a tremendous amount of more harm than good.
Business behavior becomes harmful? Businesses exist to make money on profits from customers. If they have no customers, they make no money. Monopolies can only ever exist through government force. So the evil corporate business practices that you're railing against are created by the government in the first place.
[doublepost=1472561953][/doublepost]
Should I assume youre a big government liberal because of the assumption you've made about me?
Republicans are just one side of the same foolish coin. This whole idea that the government is the solution to all our problems or any problems for that matter is completely devoid of any basis in reality.
As a matter of fact, I would like to do away with all those things. They grant special government enforced "privileges" - read rights - to certain businesses. They're enforced monopolies, create market distortion in the name of protecting the public, which is a complete lie, and do a tremendous amount of more harm than good.
Last edited:
The post you quoted isn't bashing Apple. You seem overly defensive. In multiple posts you've questioned people's knowledge of the subject matter. You should turn that question on yourself because you've yet to demonstrate any appreciable knowledge of the subject matter or Apple advertising.
Uh, what? Whatever source you use for information, please stop using it. Samsung, Google, and Apple use your data to target market to you. That is a fact. That you think Apple doesn't says you've paid more attention to what their executives said, than what the company actually does. Fact: With all three companies you have to intentionally opt out of targeted advertising. Meaning if you don't opt out, Samsung, Google, and Apple will use data collected -about you- to sell advertising. A cursory glance at any of those company's privacy policies will make that abundantly clear.
What are you talking about? Apple created Apple Pay, not NFC (that encrypted secure payment system you mentioned). The banks are asking for the ability to access NFC, not Apple Pay. Having a choice is what's best for the consumer. The ability to choose between Apple Pay and the banks' solutions should be what all sides are working for, ya know, in the best interest of the customer.
Both sides want more control of the customer. Neither side wants that control for altruistic reasons. To think otherwise is naive. Just so we're clear: My post isn't a criticism of either side in this issue. It is a criticism of your post and it's abundance of incorrect assumptions. So please don't confuse this as Apple bashing.
Do you think Apple and Google are anywhere in the same universe when it comes to the amount of data they collect from you?
Yes, phenomenal idea. Let banks, hapless victims of hackers, gain access to your entire wallet on your phone.
[doublepost=1472564869][/doublepost]
So banks all over the world have agreed to accept Apple Pay under assumingly acceptable terms, yet in Australia, specifically, Apple is demanding "onerous and potentially damaging terms". Is that what you're saying? Your statement reeks of anti-Apple bias.
Last edited:
From me (or you), as an individual? Yes, I do think they generally collect a similar amount of information. You see, I've looked at both their privacy policies. So I'm fairly sure they do. From a general perspective? No, I don't think Apple collects as much. I know they couldn't possibly do so. The numbers give Google a near insurmountable edge in overall aggregated data collection. Google is on pretty much every platform and Apple is only on it's own for the most part (iTunes and Apple Music notwithstanding).
My question to you. If they're both collecting data, does the fact that Google collects more overall make some kind of difference to you? Their aggregate total of collected data has little to do with what they get from each individual. They're both collecting similar information from individuals. Google has more individuals to collect from. Both companies use that data for a number of reasons, including advertising. How does Google's success with advertising somehow make their data collection worse?
Open up the hardware?
In my mind, if consumers want to use Apple-based services, they choose an iPhone. If they want to use anything else, they choose an Android or another option.
I don't see why Apple should be forced to make their hardware work with third-party payment systems. Consumers already have a choice.
That's the "Australian Competition and Consumer Commission". If you want to, please fix the typo.
[doublepost=1472574501][/doublepost]
All of the big 4 (CBA, NAB, ANZ, Westpc) are greedy and only care about profits. Thinking otherise is just ignoring the facts.
[doublepost=1472574808][/doublepost]
This is mostly true in Australia too (I am Australian). Government has stepped in here at times to improve consumer rights. Unions on the other hand have done nothing here in the last 60 years apart from hurt consumer and worker rights and fatten up their union boss banka ccounts through intimidation and corruption.
Saying that about the NFC subsystem, is like saying Apple should only allow the iPhone's WiFi and Bluetooth radios to talk to other Apple devices. Verizon, Sprint and others already tried that kind of lockdown with NFC a few years ago. Perhaps you're not aware of Isis (later called SoftPay).
Some of you are confusing Apple Pay with NFC. That's like confusing iMessage with the WiFi radio it uses.
Banks are not asking to use Apple Pay; they want to access the NFC subsystem. It's like someone wanting to use WiFi for their own messaging app, and Apple saying no.
Apple uses its intimate knowledge of us via iTunes, location services, etc to implement targeted iAds. Just because they've been rather unsuccessful at selling such ads (because of... no surprise... greedy rates), does not make it any less a use of our private info.
Not to mention raking in bilions from Google search kickbacks by selling the top search position to them. Or blackmailing banks into paying a royalty just to let their own banking customers register with the non-Apple credit card applets in the Secure Element.
These are some ways that Apple pimps out its users, so it can claim to have clean hands even while making billions in kickbacks behind the scenes.
I'm with you as far as how aggravatingly slowing-down ads have gotten. My iPad browser hangs constantly from too many background ad streams, as does Chrome on my older laptop computer.
OTOH, ads pay for many sites we all like to use. E.g. anyone here who's not paying MacRumors a yearly membership fee, but complains about ad supported services, is a hypocrite.
Not only does Apple dodge paying taxes in every country it operates in, but Apple Pay's background fee slowly sucks extra money from target countries' banks into Apple's offshore accounts. Most of which, as few people know, ends up being stashed in New York banks by its Irish subsidiaries... where Apple cannot use it, but the banks can!
So, as an American, I would like to personally thank the people of every other country that is buying iPhones at a huge markup, or sending Apple Pay fees via their banks, since those nearly two hundred billions of offshore profit are being used by American banks to fund American business loans and mortgages. The monetary assimilation has begun. Resistance is futile
Last edited:
It didn't make the (now) obese Jonathon Ive any thinner.
[doublepost=1472575231][/doublepost]
As it should. Legally minimising the tax you pay is what your shareholders expect.
Actually, courts have ruled that there is no such obligation for corporations.
Sometimes being a good citizen is the right road to take. Especially if you're using a heckuva lot of that country's infrastructure and legal systems to your advantage.
It's weird to me that only Apple (at least at Macrumors) seems to be held to these unrealistic ideals, while every other corporation on the planet is free to maximize profits.
Just because other organisations either negotiated an acceptable position behind closed doors or accepted originally offered terms doesn't mean they are appropriate or acceptable to every business globally. If Apple are so keen to get their business they should accomodate their needs or look elsewhere rather than attempt to coerce potential customers into doing what they demand.
My original post suggested one possible reason why the bank rejected their CA, I dd not offer it as fact. You appear to be as pro-Apple and blind to alternate interpretations of their actions as I am apparently "anti".
Any corporation or person is obviously free to maximize profits if that's all they want to stand for. Although sure, they're better citizens if they give back to their communities with services or donations, etc.
I was mainly addressing the common misconception that it's somehow a requirement for corporations to avoid taxes. It's not.
While I'm at it, another bogus idea is that it's somehow the same as normal taxpayers avoiding paying more taxes than necessary, for a company to go to incredible lengths to come up with convoluted schemes that no lawmaker could foresee.
Last edited:
Damn well it makes a difference how much data is collected. Especially if there's a leak or hack. Or if someone in the company decides to use that data for other means. Plus the fact that 90% of Googles revenue comes from advertising based off the information. Apple? It's so low it doesn't even reach 1%. It's more a a service than a revenue generator. And if the market changes such that targeted ad revenues suddenly fall (a new browser with real ad blocking), who do you think is likely to bend the rules to look for new revenue streams from that data? The company whose very existence depends on it or the company whose revenue is change they found in the couch?
As to privacy policies, every tech company out there has pretty much an identical policy. So you claiming they are all about the same because their policies are the same is ridiculous. Those policies are just industry standard privacy policies written by lawyers to cover their asses. They have nothing to do with the "ethics" of a company nor are they specific enough to give anyone an idea where your data is really going.
You mean, like if someone leaked or hacked the iTunes database with all its credit card account numbers and personal information?
-Versus, say, someone hacking Google and finding out what my past searches are (assuming I have it set for them to keep them)?
-Or someone hacking a grocery store and finding out what foods I buy?
-Or someone hacking a token processor and getting access to all of the token-to-real account number tables?
Seems to me that quality of data is more important than quantity.
And anyone is open to hacks or leaks.
Last edited:
MacRumours has a good balance of ad space vs content and full marks for that. Many sites however, including pay ones, have way too many - I resent paying for a news site and still getting bombarded intrusively with ads. It must surely end up being counter-productive and lose sites traffic in the long run?Saying that about the NFC subsystem, is like saying Apple should only allow the iPhone's WiFi and Bluetooth radios to talk to other Apple devices. Verizon, Sprint and others already tried that kind of lockdown with NFC a few years ago. Perhaps you're not aware of Isis (later called SoftPay).
Some of you are confusing Apple Pay with NFC. That's like confusing iMessage with the WiFi radio it uses.
Banks are not asking to use Apple Pay; they want to access the NFC subsystem. It's like someone wanting to use WiFi for their own messaging app, and Apple saying no.
Apple uses its intimate knowledge of us via iTunes, location services, etc to implement targeted iAds. Just because they've been rather unsuccessful at selling such ads (because of... no surprise... greedy rates), does not make it any less a use of our private info.
Not to mention raking in bilions from Google search kickbacks by selling the top search position to them. Or blackmailing banks into paying a royalty just to let their own banking customers register with the non-Apple credit card applets in the Secure Element.
These are some ways that Apple pimps out its users, so it can claim to have clean hands even while making billions in kickbacks behind the scenes.
I'm with you as far as how aggravatingly slowing-down ads have gotten. My iPad browser hangs constantly from too many background ad streams, as does Chrome on my older laptop computer.
OTOH, ads pay for many sites we all like to use. E.g. anyone here who's not paying MacRumors a yearly membership fee, but complains about ad supported services, is a hypocrite.
Not only does Apple dodge paying taxes in every country it operates in, but Apple Pay's background fee slowly sucks extra money from target countries' banks into Apple's offshore accounts. Most of which, as few people know, ends up being stashed in New York banks by its Irish subsidiaries... where Apple cannot use it, but the banks can!
So, as an American, I would like to personally thank the people of every other country that is buying iPhones at a huge markup, or sending Apple Pay fees via their banks, since those nearly two hundred billions of offshore profit are being used by American banks to fund American business loans and mortgages. The monetary assimilation has begun. Resistance is futile
So your entire argument rests on a non-existent hypothetical? 1. Data from every company is always at risk of being leaked or hacked. Always will be. Liking Apple doesn't make their collected data any less a risk for your hypothetical. 2. Using data for undisclosed means? Newsflash: We only know what companies do with our data because of what they say they do. We have no idea whether it's true or not. Yes, that includes Apple as well.
You know what's really ridiculous? Subscribing to the theory of "I'll reject your reality and supplant it with my own". If A company specifically tells you in writing that they do A, B, C, and D, but you -of your own accord- decide they "really don't mean it".
That seems a bit deluded. Ethics? Ethics, really? You mean ethics like this, maybe?
So much text. So little meaning.
[doublepost=1472592102][/doublepost]I like how most of the people siding with the Australian banks and bashing Apple on here don't even live in Australia, or know anything about Australia.
So your entire argument rests on a non-existent hypothetical? 1. Data from every company is always at risk of being leaked or hacked. Always will be. Liking Apple doesn't make their collected data any less a risk for your hypothetical. 2. Using data for undisclosed means? Newsflash: We only know what companies do with our data because of what they say they do. We have no idea whether it's true or not. Yes, that includes Apple as well.
You know what's really ridiculous? Subscribing to the theory of "I'll reject your reality and supplant it with my own". If A company specifically tells you in writing that they do A, B, C, and D, but you -of your own accord- decide they "really don't mean it".
So you're going to deflect away from data collection and bring up something completely unrelated (taxes)? Is this what you do when someone calls you out for an incorrect assumption in the first place? And second place?
[doublepost=1472593666][/doublepost]
And a Google hack could expose all your personal details and credit card numbers for Google Wallet as well. Oh, and your entire purchase history, since Google tracks those (while Apple doesn't). Or information about your health based on your searches for conditions or treatments. Or your sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, political affiliation or any other items which could be used in nefarious ways. Hell, you could be concerned about a person at your kids school and do a bunch of reasesrch about pedophelia, only to be mistakenly thought of as a pedophile yourself.
Are you really that naive as to how much Google knows about you? Or think that any leak at Apple would be anywhere near as destructive as a leak at Google?
Last edited:
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple pulled out of the Australian market altogether over crap like this. Australia is a tiny fish compared to other markets, so it's not worth their trouble to make a fundamental change to their operating system just because 3 banks don't want to lose some profits.