Why would the US take sides in this? It's not discriminatory against US companies in particular.
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 Regulators Accept Apple Commitments to Open NFC Access to Rivals
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep. There is clearly a difference in perspective amongst the posters.
You might just be living in crazy world where you are currently living. But here all that is mostly automated, or just done on your phone without leaving the bed.
There’s no need to go to the bank physically. And at worst it might take a week. It sounds like crazy world when you speak of overdraft fees.
Now for me I would never have my investments in the same bank. And I use 5 different banks for their different services( listed in previous comment to you). All their cards are in my Apple wallet( except forex) and I login to them all with BankID(except Revolut as it’s from the Uk)
Switching from Swedbank to Lunar/N26 (Digital Bank)
Switching from Swedbank to SEB (Traditional Bank)He who knows
What on earth would you connect with your account? Every service I have ever registered with uses a debit card to pay for the services. I would never in a million years register my bank account with any service.
With the only exception being phone bill, utility bills and the gym. Everything else is connected with my card I can cancel at anytime.
And again as the context of this conversation was in regards to Apple Pay and the Apple wallet.
You don’t need to move your entire financial existence to get access to Apple Pay. Bank transfers is instantaneous.
I could just open a new Lunar/N26 account to use their debit card with Apple pay.
Getting my Apple Watch turn close to useless, transitioning the tens of accounts with login with Apple. Repurchases of hundreds of apps that might or might not exist, losing iMessage. Getting a new email and stop using my me/icloud mail and transition to Gmail or outlook. etc etc. It’s not that easy to move from being an iPhone user to android user.
I have had my iPhone since iPhone 3G 2009~. So I have a very large amount of data that would need to transition.
Last edited:
We all know Google approval is different to Apple. There is nowhere near the same level of vetting apps for malware or rules on what gets in there.
And Googles stance is more “game emulators are not illegal” and disregards that’s using stolen ROMs is.
Apple stance is more emulators allow the use of stolen ROMs and until recently they chose to not allow “legal” emulators because they looked holistically at the app use.
I don’t care how long it takes to switch accounts.
If you read my comment elsewhere the difference is switching to Android phone is a choice you make because you want the freedoms to install any app.
This change is being forced on us by the banks. They can stop using Wallet to avoid the tiny fee and their choice to do that could force us all the effort to switch banks and set up all over again.
Your choice vs their choice.
That’s the issue in a nutshell.
Oh you say that but it’s no difference.
What do you do when Apple removed Epic games from the AppStore? Apple forces your hand if you want to continue to play Fortnight or infinity blade. You no longer can do that on your iPhone as they removed your perfectly working copy.
Their choice in regard to removing their cards from the Apple wallet is no more consequential than you downloading a different streaming app.
You don’t need to switch banks or do anything drastic. Download N26( or bank app of choice) apply for an account, ad the new card to the apple wallet and make a bank transfer all before your coffee has finished brewing.
P.s it’s not a tiny fee when it can be as much as 50% of their interchange revenue.
In one camp I need pay 1.000$ for a new iPhone equivalent android phone so I can install fortnight or whatever app that isn’t available. And transfer my entire digital life.
And the other I can keep my account and all its functions and pay 0$ for the ability to use Apple Pay without the need to transfer my bank life to a new service.
But for some unclear reasons you think the first option is perfectly acceptable and reasonable while the other isn’t at all and borderline ridiculous?
Last edited:
Switching your entire digital life (or the „mobile“ part of it) to new smartphone with a different OS isn‘t as simple as buying a phone and changing the SIM card.
That‘s either deluded - or purposely being disingenuous.
Your messenger apps. banking and two-factor authentication apps don’t sync activate themselves overnight. Neither do your payment cards from Apple Pay. Let alone other in-app data from third-party apps - my thesaurus and dictionary favourites don‘t just transfer over to an equivalent but different app on another OS.
Sounds like you‘d benefit from an account switching service as mandated by the European Union. 😄
Also, why would you go in person to cancel your bank account? Is your bank - or your jurisdiction‘s regulation - as backwards to require going in person? I‘ve cancelled or closed banking relationships in half a dozen European countries or so - and never went to a branch to close an account or banking relationship.
Google Play is subject to the same legal rules with regards to copyright.
We weren‘t speaking of malware - we were speaking about the legality of retro game emulators. Among there are high-profile apps with millions of downloads (and tens of thousands of reviews) available on Google Play. Thats not slipping through the cracks a a laxer review/approval process.
They still don’t have to allow them in non-EU jurisdictions - yet did.
And they wouldn’t, if their concern was really about privacy.
Side note: they also have no qualms about notarising emulator apps one iOS.
The more reasonable and convincing explanation is that Apple preferred native (or at least dedicated apps/ports of) games on their app store for their higher monetisation potential.
And now they‘re trying to steal the thunder from third-party app stores by allowing them on their own store. Cause as you said yourself - and I largely agree with that - retro gaming console emulators are popular - with a user base that’s particularly active and vocal in internet discussion forums and on social media.
They wanted to sell games on their app store. And they don‘t want a large number of users clamouring for similar regulation elsewhere - or spread the impression that such regulation is beneficial.
Last edited:
steal the thunder or admit the EU decision opens a can of worms and they can perhaps avoid the same happening elsewhere by reversing a longstanding ban on emulator apps. everywhere. it takes a lot of wind out of the sails...
Google Play simply took the stance that emulators werent themselves illegal. they just turned a blind eye to the obvious "but it wont do anything useful without a ROM to emulate" part. Apple didnt. Until EU forced side apps. So it was out of their hands. Regardless of Apple's view, the fact emulators were about to be made available on their devices meant they really had one choice: enable the apps and hope it minimises any drift to alt app stores.
I'm waiting to see how big a deal the alt Epic store is.
It wont be cheaper.
They can already do exactly that now on Android and I dont see much noise about people wanting it.
Most people use GooglePlay store or sideload APK files directly. Many ignorant of the risk or tricked.
Then we can wait and see Spotify's response to the DMA directive.
What will happen when growth is still minimal?
Could it be other higher quality, more customer/artist focussed streamers are more popular?
End of the day I doubt many users are going to notice or change their buying behaviour.
We are lucky in Australia that we can complain to a banking ombudsman.
If any bank decides to release their own banking payment app and remove Apple Wallet support I hope they get lots of complaints and are forced to continue their current way alongside any inhouse system.
I mean, if we want to go there, what's stopping people from simply buying a 2nd Samsung phone to download Fortnite (via the epic games store), or sideload emulators, or do a bunch of other stuff you can't normally perform on an iPhone (like maybe Dex), while continuing to main your iPhone? It doesn't even have to be the latest model, seeing how quickly their phones tend to depreciate in value.
I can acknowledge the irony (or hypocrisy), while also pointing out that users seem to be vastly over-exaggerating the cost and effort involved in switching phones, when there are already plenty of people who regularly move between iOS and android, or even main 2 phones.
And I suppose when it comes to switching banks, it also depends on how far one is willing to go. It's relatively straightforward to apply for a new credit card from a new bank which supports Apple Pay, it's another to go all the distance in moving all your money over before closing your account with the previous bank to punish it for having the temerity to withdraw support for it.
So I guess...which category would you all fall in?
Honestly if you said the sky was blue some would argue on here just the sake of it.
How many on this forum honestly dont have a drawer full of assorted hardware that still works and could be repurposed for things like game emulators? Many useful working items I've given away. Some I keep to my memory collection. (or as less polite people say, hoarding).
When we buy new phones, it is nowhere near the hassle it used to be.
You can sync data and apps through the cloud.
It's basically painless compared to 10 years ago.
Even moving from one platform to another.
I delayed ditching Spotify to go to Apple Music.
Now I wonder why I waited. It was painless.
How many on this forum honestly dont have a drawer full of assorted hardware that still works and could be repurposed for things like game emulators? Many useful working items I've given away. Some I keep to my memory collection. (or as less polite people say, hoarding).
When we buy new phones, it is nowhere near the hassle it used to be.
You can sync data and apps through the cloud.
It's basically painless compared to 10 years ago.
Even moving from one platform to another.
I delayed ditching Spotify to go to Apple Music.
Now I wonder why I waited. It was painless.
German government had already used Apple NFC for its AusweisApp Bundes (federal identification card app) for a several years. This app allows Germans to use Apple iPhone's NFC to tap their identification cards with eID function as to identify themselves digitally, allowing them to use the online service used by various governmental agencies electronically and securely. This saves Germans the audacious trip to the physical Behörden buildings and wait for their turn at the booths or desks. It can be used as to authenticate the transactions and such.
So you agree it’s good that regulators can „force“ companies to offer or alter their product into something they don’t want to?
What’s stopping
Did you not read the rest of the response that was right below the post you just quoted?
Read the rest of the post you quoted. Yes it’s easy enough to open another bank account (although requires giving out personal data to yet another company).
But our point is it’s extremely hypocritical of all you EU defenders saying this “pro-consumer” regulation is necessary because users are “locked” into iOS and then turn around and say “if you don’t like it it’s easy enough to switch banks” when switching OSes is just as easy, if not easier.
Not to mention in the case of iOS you knew the limitations of OS when you bought your phone and BOUGHT IT ANYWAY. In this example, you didn’t know your bank was going to opt out of Apple Wallet because the “pro consumer” legislation.
It’s no more hypocritical than the „just buy Android“ argument.
And I‘ve been very aware of that.
Neither did I know they would introduce Apple Pay before they did.
Even if they do opt out of Apple Pay, that doesn’t mean customers will be unable to make card payments.
Sometimes. Regulations are necessary and the question has always been when does it become too much and too what end.
No, it is not. The infrastructure and the payment providers using this infrastructure is of banking and payment system regulation. What EUC is doing is that they developers have all access to Apple API with no ties to Apple Pay and Apple Wallet - essentiall enabling them to use their own solution if they want.
They do regulate by opening up closed ecosystems, forcing users take more and more steps to get things done. By enabling the NFC and the payment though NFC to eb opened to all, by all means, allows banks to use their own wallets to execute payments, where I as a consumer may have to work with multiple locations and UXs to get what I need.
Whereas I do have the option nwo to get them all under one location which is a great convenience I enjoy as a user.
If EUC said that all Apple APIs are now up to grabs (Wallet, Pay) UNDER AGREEMENT that they have to support Apple Pay and Apple Wallet, then I woudl have the ultimate choice as a consumer to pick what I want.
As I think more about it, I suppose another counter argument is that iOS has always been closed, and consumers presumably go in with both eyes open. It’s like going to a Japanese restaurant, and then complaining that it doesn’t serve French cuisine.
In short, Apple has always been very clear and consistent since day one about what you are getting (and what you are not getting) when you purchase an iPhone, and they have never gone back on this promise. You couldn’t have not known what you were getting yourself into at the time, so why act all shocked and indignant right now?
Or as the saying goes - you either marry the woman you love, or learn to love the woman you marry.
It’s a different case with banks who offered one thing at the start (when Apple Pay was the only payment option available on the iPhone) and then subsequently changed their minds as NFC was opened up.
Times changed, and I changed in response to the changing circumstances around me.
I knew. And I‘ve always felt uneasy about it, right from the beginning when they announced their store would be the only way of distribution of apps.
And become progressively more alienated (from being a true Apple „fan“ years ago) and repulsed by Apple‘s policies and behaviour, particularly with regards to their mobile ecosystem.
The final straw - that convinced me and made me support legislation against their App Store monopoly - may have been their initial policy about game streaming apps. Somewhat ironically, since I‘m totally not the consumer to use such services. But their policy was clearly made up and specifically tailored to anticompetitively stifle the competition in gaming - while being inconsistent with their existing rules (on streaming content).
Note though that that was policy they instituted many years after I committed to the iOS ecosystem.
I couldn’t have known what their policies would be.
And the same is true for Apple Pay.
Netflix or Amazon could clearly stream violent or erotic content via their iOS app as part of a subscription - without every single movie or TV show needing to be reviewed and approved by Apple.
Last edited:
This discussion is interesting, but a little pointless, as it has already happened, at least for EU countries.
And IMO obviously, this regulation is more pro-banks/payment providers than pro-customer, because customers can't directly benefit from that. Actually, customers are not benefiting anything from that, as commonly, using Apple/Google Pay is free. So, it will not be cheaper
And both changing whole phone ecosystem or bank account can be quite frustrating, so we as customer are not free to exchange both if any regulation will make our UX in given system worse. Even in EU changing bank, especially if you have credit cards, some line of credit etc., is not so easy as S*nut describes. What is for sure easy and usually not expensive is setting up new account. But those free accounts are usually very, very basic with quite serious limitations, and we still have inconvenience of splitting funds.
Saying that it will make ground for new wallet/mobile payments solution is illusory. How many such solution we have? Apple/Google Pay, then long nothing, then Samsung/Garmin Pay, again long nothing and then some local, limited solutions.
So, from this change will benefit mostly only banks which were still stubborn enough to do not implement Apple/Google Pay and maybe their customers stubborn enough to still keep with those banks, because maybe, will get at last some imitation of mobile payment system (because Apple/Google Pay is not only NFC, but is also possibility to use it in apps or on web pages).
But if bank already support Apple/Google Pay what would be point to back from Apple Pay and not from Google Pay? This change will only level ground with what is available on Android and at least in my (EU) country, all consumer banks support Google Pay so I don't see a point for them to back off from Apple Pay.
And IMO obviously, this regulation is more pro-banks/payment providers than pro-customer, because customers can't directly benefit from that. Actually, customers are not benefiting anything from that, as commonly, using Apple/Google Pay is free. So, it will not be cheaper
And both changing whole phone ecosystem or bank account can be quite frustrating, so we as customer are not free to exchange both if any regulation will make our UX in given system worse. Even in EU changing bank, especially if you have credit cards, some line of credit etc., is not so easy as S*nut describes. What is for sure easy and usually not expensive is setting up new account. But those free accounts are usually very, very basic with quite serious limitations, and we still have inconvenience of splitting funds.
Saying that it will make ground for new wallet/mobile payments solution is illusory. How many such solution we have? Apple/Google Pay, then long nothing, then Samsung/Garmin Pay, again long nothing and then some local, limited solutions.
So, from this change will benefit mostly only banks which were still stubborn enough to do not implement Apple/Google Pay and maybe their customers stubborn enough to still keep with those banks, because maybe, will get at last some imitation of mobile payment system (because Apple/Google Pay is not only NFC, but is also possibility to use it in apps or on web pages).
But if bank already support Apple/Google Pay what would be point to back from Apple Pay and not from Google Pay? This change will only level ground with what is available on Android and at least in my (EU) country, all consumer banks support Google Pay so I don't see a point for them to back off from Apple Pay.
Japan still use cash to pay things a lot than card.
And different is automatically better? The question is “what would another wallet do to improve the experience for the USER?