Amazing how invested some are in the total destruction of a company because they can't pay with their phone at the moment. Truly astonishing.
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.
CVS Stores Reportedly Disabling NFC to Shut Down Apple Pay and Google Wallet
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Amazing how invested some are in the total destruction of a company because they can't pay with their phone at the moment. Truly astonishing.
After some debate I went wifi. The ability to use my iPhone as a hotspot meant I could save $150 for the cell option and $10/month with the carrier. Since I alredy have a share plan, this works well for me.
Nonsense, it has to do with the strong-armed way of pushing the anti-consumer MCX system. Most people don't care much about Apple Pay or contactless, really. But we do care about making sure MCX fails.
Can we use Google Wallet over NFC in the iPhone? No, Apple is not likely to allow a competing NFC wallet.
Can we use PayPal in the Apple Pay wallet? No, Apple changed their mind, reportedly out of spite over PayPal doing a Samsung fingerprint sensor app.
By blocking other payment methods themselves, especially while taking a percentage of each Apple Pay transaction, Apple has removed any chance of having some kind of moral high ground about payment choices or "non core" business.
Apple is pushing Apple Pay for reasons similar to why the merchants are pushing their own payment system. They see us as a resource for their own financial gain.
--
Cold business logic aside, I agree that it's not nice to take away something some people already had. I think MCX will fail, and we'll end up back with NFC, just unfortunately delayed.
Apple Pay will do much better in countries where a lot more people are used to contactless payments already. So right now I'm more interested in finding out if Apple Pay works at things like Oyster card readers, where payment speed can really count (versus a pharmacy counter, where it's not that big a deal, especially compared to now).
The schedule for the worldside rollout of EMV was decided by the EMVCo credit card companies.
They scheduled the US as last, partly because the US already had online authorization of every single transaction. And partly because of the enormous cost of terminal and card replacement.
There are 15 million POS terminals in the US, compared to about 10 million in all of the Asia-Pacific region.
The US cost to convert to EMV (terminals and card replacements) is estimated to be almost $9 billion.
Lol. You understand you posted a graph from 6 years (it was made in 2008) ago? Past 2008, it's actually shows "projected" growth. Don't let facts stand in your way though. But, I speak to you from the future: BD is basically a dead technology today. Next time you mindlessly post something, try reading it.
http://m.ign.com/articles/2008/06/16/futuresource-compares-blu-ray-and-dvd-hardware-sales-history
Last edited:
Right - so let's wish a total destruction of a corporation over it rather than just the demise of MCX. Much better to wish Rite-Aid, CVS and other stores go out of business because of it
Right - so let's wish a total destruction of a corporation over it rather than just the demise of MCX. Much better to wish Rite-Aid, CVS and other stores go out of business because of it
Well, Walmart is the worst - they're the ones that started MCX but yes, MCX is a partnership between these companies, so yes, I think competition that doesn't participate in such things deserves the business.
Personally I look at the big picture and I wouldn't wish any of these companies involved in the consortium fail as a business. Do I hope that they re-examine/re-assess their decision in regards to NFC payments. Absolutely. But even if they fail to turn them back on, I don't wish nor would I take "glee" out of them going out of business.
I am sure most here are speaking in hyperbole when they make comments like that. Sadly, I do think there are some that are not.
Ye5, you came here, at the end of a 100 page and tell us that... A subject you supposedly don't care about.. What does that say about your own sad life.
If you hate first world problems so much, hop on a plane and go resolve third world ones instead of posting pointless retorts online.
I don't know about anyone else, but the fact that (1) I would need to provide a driver's license, social security number and bank account number and (2) I am not allowed to use my credit cards which offer, at a minimum, a 2% cash rebate on everything I buy, makes this a non-starter for me. With the rewards cards that are available, it doesn't make sense not to use them any time credit card payments are an option.
Your rant has no factual basis at all. You are heavily biased and are not seeing the very obvious dilemma that small businesses are in.
Many businesses also do not accept American Express for payment because of the per transaction fee; I doubt most people will switch to Walgreen's, et., they'll simply pay the 'old fashioned' way, with a credit card.....
CVS recently also stopped selling tobacco products, smokers still shop there, just buy their ciggies somewhere else......
Not from the user standpoint. I have the Starbucks app and when I walk into a Starbucks I touch Id into my phone, tap passbook when I have placed right on the front homepage and tap my Starbucks card then flip my phone around for the cashier to scan. All in less time than it takes me to say my order.
As I said, really not that much worse than using Apple Pay.
It's not the same thing as not accepting American Express. All Apple Pay is, is your existing credit cards. It's like saying we only want to take Visa, but it has to be from Bank of America, or MasterCard, but only from CapitalOne and Citibank, shame if you have Wells Fargo.
My comment wasn't a reply about security or privacy but about convenience to the user. It would be nice, even respectful, if you would reply to comments in the context they were made.
As for my comment, and it's context, I guess, like the person about five comments about you, the two of you are also so lazy that a couple of taps and an extra two seconds you would be waiting for the cashier to finish typing or scanning your goods is just too much for you. How ever do you three actually function on this world which will likely never give you the split second instant gratification you demand.
The analogy was meant to illustrate that there are a multitude of alternate ways to pay, including *gasp* cash. If a business doesn't accept one of them, then that's not such a big deal; if they ONLY accept their own, proprietary payment method, THAT's shooting yourself in the wallet.
Besides, you know how often people say 'that's it, I'm switching to another store"? LOTS. You know how many really do it? Not many.....
And the ones you really wish would go away, they NEVER leave.....
I received a reply from Rite Aid customer service:
"Thank you for taking the time to contact us! I apologize for the delay in response and for any inconvenience this may have caused you. Given that we are still in the process of evaluating our mobile payment options, Rite Aid does not currently accept ApplePay. We are continually evaluating various forms of mobile payment technologies, and are committed to offering convenient, reliable and secure payment methods that meet the needs of our customers. We apologize again for any inconvenience this may have caused you, and we hope to have this feature available in the future. Have a nice day, and thank you for choosing Rite Aid!"
Mark
"Thank you for taking the time to contact us! I apologize for the delay in response and for any inconvenience this may have caused you. Given that we are still in the process of evaluating our mobile payment options, Rite Aid does not currently accept ApplePay. We are continually evaluating various forms of mobile payment technologies, and are committed to offering convenient, reliable and secure payment methods that meet the needs of our customers. We apologize again for any inconvenience this may have caused you, and we hope to have this feature available in the future. Have a nice day, and thank you for choosing Rite Aid!"
Mark
You clearly don't understand the issue. However, Business Week does. I suggest you read this quote from their article on the controversy. This is the crux of the issue (it has nothing to do with who is faster or which method of payment is prettier or anything else):
Rite Aid and CVS screwed up the optics on this one. It’s hard to argue that you’re doing right by your customers when you stop accepting a form of payment that you’ve already demonstrated presents no technical hurdles. They also don’t have an alternative to offer. CurrentC isn’t expected to be ready until 2015, and the specifics of the system aren’t public.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-27/why-rite-aid-and-cvs-stopped-taking-apple-pay
Why is that so hard for some people to understand? Its not an Apple thing or a which payment is faster thing -- its a store pulling a dick move and, by the way, Apple Pay is more convenient. Just point your phone while pressing touchId -- (tah dah -- done).
----------
That is mindless corporate speak that says nothing. Clearly crafted by the PR or marketing department. I hate those types of responses.