Well there you go, that makes the desire for companies to invest R&D money in new and innovative products a waste in EU.
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.
EU Plans to Hit Apple With Antitrust Charges Over Apple Pay
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And is the line where pricing is assessed is arbitrary? I would assume that pricing would be done at the retail level prior to hardware purchase.
If my bank started trying to force me to use their app over Apple Wallet, I'll be leaving for another bank that doesn't. I don't get why this is an issue, every bank I've used can have their card in the wallet. Every credit card. Being able to double click (on my watch) and then select the card I want (from competing banks) is great. I don't want to have to fire up an app, log in, then pay or go to settings, change which app is launched when HFC payment is detected then pay.
All the examples you offer require the support of the third party...nothing to do with Apple. Amusement parks/airlines don't offer NFC tickets because they don't support the tech (and, at least for airlines, probably won't for a very long time).
You can use Apple Pay to buy a NYC subway ride without unlocking, and you can use Apple Pay to purchase train tickets and multi-use passes.
And I'm totally fine with being unable to install a contactless "extension," thank you very much. The train operator should get it together and offer native Wallet support.
Agreed. Unfortunately it's not super easy to change banks.
It used to be for a auto manufacturer to sell vehicles here, they had conform to the US DOT requirements, as far as lighting, safety, etc. if you didn't you can't sell here, those sleek headlights..that lit the road of the European cars were not allowed. US DOT required "5 MPH bumpers" that were fugly, but supposed to protect from bad parkers. Made the European and Asian cars ugly.
I don't want and will not accept anything where I don't need to unlock a device to have a transaction. You can also get all kinds of bad crap on you Android phone too and less so on an iPhone
You don’t really “get” stiffling competition (its STIFLING BTW)? not offering a feature other have is NOT stifling competition. If anything, it actually HURTSS as user migrate to a platform that DOES offer, what they want. I’ve never heard a single person with device, wish they had Google pay or some other competitors payment system on their device.
I think the alternative here is for Apple to not block Gpay, Samsung Pay, etc. from the App store. Then they wouldn't be in this mess.
Having used all 3, opening that up is no threat. Apple pay is far better than the others and if you have Apple devices, you're using Apple pay.
So you are, but still by limiting third parties an access to NFC is an abuse of power. Let the user decide do they let an app to have an access to NFC or not. Same as you let Whatsapp to access your camera/contacts or not. I don’t, because Facebook is a peeping-tom of companies. Same goes with Google why I prefer Apple. But I very much would like to have my 30 day bus card loaded to my phone.
EU antitrust laws are quite different from the U.S. laws. The EU has a much broader definition of what constitutes anti-competitive activity.
I think banks have learned this lesson already though.
They all tried that already and unsurprisingly, realized literally no one used their proprietary apps to do this because who TF wants to have a separate app for every card they have? No body.
The opposite is more true as most banks have sunset this feature entirely from their apps. Realistically, that sliver of 0.19% they pay Apple is probably not far off from the costs of development and maintenance of their own home brewed feature. There is a lot more behind these systems than just an app.
Even though the comment you were replying to was stupidly absurd, I think your reply needs some clarification.
The sealed beam rule was enacted to prevent numerous OEMs with myriad vehicle designs (look at a 1930’s Lincoln Zephyr lamp for example) but only primitive abilities to uniformly sharply focus and cut off the beams with consistent illumination (so drivers could see and opposite traffic wouldn’t be blinded). Other considerations were that a sealed beam never suffered from illumination degradation due to dust or water ingress fouling the reflex or lens (unless chipped by a stone.)
This limitation of choice was was a government decision (possibly under lobbying pressure from, or in collusion with, independent bulb makers like GE, Tungsol & Sylvania, or captives like GM’s Guide Lamp Div.) as opposed to an OEM-led one.
If say GM, with then >50% market share, had decided to go with the sealed beam lamp, it would have represented merely a styling decision with safety implications, but, if GM held IP blocking the competition from such bulbs, it might have become an issue where the market behemoth was blocking others from implementing a technology that was in the public’s vital interest. (This is arguably what Apple is vis a vis a closed Apple Pay not being offered to payment competitors.)
Regarding halogen sealed beam, your statement is inaccurate. Halogen sealed beams were offered (standard) on the Lincoln Versailles sometime around 1977-79, and halogen sealed beams rapidly proliferated in the US until being eclipsed by composite headlamps starting around 1983.
comment: IMHO, compared to Europe, the US’ FMVSS headlamp requirement has fallen behind that of Europe but the US’ side marker requirement still leads Europe’s.
By dropping the option for Apple Pay on their credit and debit cards.
The Swiss banking cartel has tried to frustrate ApplePay from the start and even the banks that have introduced AP have severely limited its availability across their card offerings.
Banks are not customer focused.
yes — sometimes i forget how serious people can get here))))
I remember a friend getting Cibie rounds the replaced the seed beams in his '72 240Z They used halogen lamps inside that were replaceable and were so much better, however were illegal. Then later, I did the same thing on my '71 Lincoln Mercury Capri.
My point was we have saddled other countries with our rules if you want to sell here too.
The part these regulators do not get is that the only people hurt by their actions is the user. The companies only want to get in on the action because they are greedy and see their business model going away.
Thanks for the writing correction. (corrected the original)
I chose the wording, because the comment I quoted, used it to accuse the EU to ”stifle” competition.
By denying an access to NFC for third parties, Apple is driving the community to not have services that would benefit of the STANDARD of NFC. Apple instead wants to use it locked and only through their walled garden payment system. Not to protect the user in any way, but to protect their flow of cash.
Last edited:
i need to follow up and beg for forgiveness and the removal of white thumbs in red circles. jeez!
Do it.
This company is out of control and wild with power in so many areas.
Anything that knocks them down a peg and delivers some humble pie is very welcome.
This company is out of control and wild with power in so many areas.
Anything that knocks them down a peg and delivers some humble pie is very welcome.