EU Regulators Accept Apple Commitments to Open NFC Access to Rivals

[d686546s]

how odd that the biggest proponents of opening up iOS as per EU directives are the ones who complain the loudest when people suggest there is already a choice for open systems and they can go to Android devices... yet now when banks might make their own payment apps, they also loudly say "just change banks".

double standards?

And yet, the biggest proponents of 'just switch to something else' seem to get cold feet at they suggestion they should change to something that works for them.

I frankly sympathise with you here, but I also still think that people don't switch ecosystems because of individual things. Relying on competition between ecosystems just doesn't always work on a service level.

I think if you could sympathise with that point of view we might get closer to a mutual understanding.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

1: that’s up to apple and not the bank. If they don’t want to pay Apple 30-50% of their interchange fee then Apple won’t allow them to connect with apple wallet.

And there no bank ever doing this in EU. These are all done by a banking conglomerate. Just how eID isn’t developed by one bank but all the banks in a country.

2: a store can’t legally prevent a wallet from functioning. If it used NFC then 100% of terminals work. And I don’t think a single CRM and gym card in EU that supports Apple wallet.

Yes it would as it wants full interoperability of the financial system.

Just how it’s working on having a single unified electronic ID system between 27 countries.

I live in Amsterdam, have multiple CRM cards in my wallet, from airlines, to restaurants.

I'm not talking about the Apple Wallet not functions, my point was it's not up to grabs which wallet and pay system is now defined by the app and the developer. I don't want to look through multiple wallets and payment systems...

Well that’s currently the reality. Because the wallet is barebones I use 3 different payment apps( Apple wallet, PayPal, swish)
And I use BankID to verify payments, my ID etc etc and FrejID to verify my ID in stores as it’s more well accepted.

Hi there from the Netherland mate

Any reflection to my point you'd like to debunk be my guest.

Al I'm pointing out is the exact thing that the EUC tried to do - I want to continue to use Apple Wallet and Apple Pay. What would happen that with this directive my bank, gym, restaurants etc all have separate systems that I need to find what I'm looking for? I'd like to continue to use things my way, while not preventing any other use to to it differently.

I did in the above comment.

And do you mean CRM as in credit cards with an NFC chip or magnetic card that you use to open the gym door, or pay with in store.

If you have it in the Netherlands then I’m happy for you, as it’s not in Sweden.

And considering EU mandates payment systems to be integrated and be interoperable as a goal.

This baseless fear of suddenly all banks will have their own payment app is fiction. Centralization is how it goes as it’s more efficient and cheaper. With the exception of competitive services offers something else that is more appealing.

 

[bradman83]

A lot of people here seem to be conflating Apple Pay with Apple Wallet.

Apple Wallet is an app that stores Apple Pay payment methods and other related documents like tickets and passes.

Apple Pay is an actual payment system that uses card data stored in the SoC's Secure Enclave to create payment tokens linked to a card for transaction processing, similar to what occurs with an NFC card tap or EMV chip insertion.

There is nothing to stop Apple from creating an API or otherwise allowing third party payment options to be added to the Wallet app even if they don't rely on the Apple Pay system; it's just a container for payment methods rather than a payment method itself. Banks that might not support Apple Pay could still allow their own custom NFC solutions to be added to the Wallet app in those scenarios.

There's also nothing stopping a third party company from creating a similar app now that NFC access is opened up, perhaps one with cross-platform functionality, that can be used across multiple ecosystems.

 

[stinksroundhere]

There's also nothing stopping a third party company from creating a similar app now that NFC access is opened up, perhaps one with cross-platform functionality, that can be used across multiple ecosystems.

The issue is security, which the European regulators don't give a damn about as they are happy for dirty money and human traffickers to operate throughout the continent. Politicians like to take a cut of dirty money so allowing more p2p finance apps used by criminals helps grease their palms.

Stuff like this will happen more and more.

India's wildly popular payments system attracts scammers

Fast and free, India's UPI payments system has been a big success, but has attracted scammers.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[ios-dan]

I guess the thing I've never understood how any of this benefits the consumer.
The only beneficiaries to opening up the payments systems are big banks. I can't imagine any individual iPhone user clamoring for this. But I do understand how big banks benefit from this (and let's face it. They don't need yet another fee to screw over their own customers).

So, I'm willing to listen... why do users need this?

 

[Anaxarxes]

Well that’s currently the reality. Because the wallet is barebones I use 3 different payment apps( Apple wallet, PayPal, swish)
And I use BankID to verify payments, my ID etc etc and FrejID to verify my ID in stores as it’s more well accepted.

I did in the above comment.

And do you mean CRM as in credit cards with an NFC chip or magnetic card that you use to open the gym door, or pay with in store.

If you have it in the Netherlands then I’m happy for you, as it’s not in Sweden.

And considering EU mandates payment systems to be integrated and be interoperable as a goal.

This baseless fear of suddenly all banks will have their own payment app is fiction. Centralization is how it goes as it’s more efficient and cheaper. With the exception of competitive services offers something else that is more appealing.

Even though there is a unification of interoperable payment systems, me, as a consumer, want to utilize Apple Pay and Apple Wallet in my life, I want all the services I pick to support that.

What I'm questioning is that through this openness, the developres have incentives to break this UX for me and may utilize their own systems for better control of their CRM and not to pay apple the 0,15% fee for transactions.

In the broader protection of the consumer financially, EUC is not doing us consumers in favors in usability, and cleaner UX solutions.

 

[wbeasley]

I assume not, after all no one has pushed Apple to actively support Android with the Apple Watch. If Samsung or Google, however, actively prevented the Apple Watch from working with Android or, vice versa, Apple actively prevented the Galaxy ring or any of the WatchOS devices working properly with iOS you'd have a ball game.

Remember that not even the DMA creates an obligation to actively bring your core platform services to any other platform. It doesn't even stipulate generally that you proactively have to support any other service, you just have to enable interoperability when requested.



I use PayPal on eBay for buyer protection and have never had that problem either. Beyond that I can't comment.

so if one user (potential user) asks for interoperability do they have to enable it? or just if the EU decide to ask (not even with users requesting it)?

it all seems so very vague really. I've worked in IT a long time. the worst dev projects always are the poorly spec'ed ones where the system owners can't clearly tell you what they want. the projects drag on and on and sign off is extremely challenging to get. it frustrates the dev team. it is a nightmare for test teams. and usually drags on so long everyone loses interest and it never saves money or adds the functionality people thought it would.

any spec that includes the words "may" or "might" you should run a mile from...

 

[Zest28]

Man, the EU is now harrassing X / Twitter because people can buy a "blue icon". Can't make this **** up.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Sounds like you are advocating for taking control away from consumers. Consumers shouldn’t have to switch banks to get Apple Pay; every bank should be forced to offer Apple Pay if that’s what the consumers wants to use. Consumers should have the power, not the businesses.

Consumers are fully in control.

What you’re talking about is removing apples control over users and businesses in regards to what services they provide and is used.

Considering Apple takes 5-10 years or so to launch something outside the USA.

All of the services below would be available day 1 if Apple actually allowed 3rd party usage of the same software and hardware.

1. Apple Pay
• USA Launch: 2014
• EU Full Availability: 2020
2. Apple Pay Express Transit
• USA Launch: 2019
• EU Full Availability: Not fully available in all EU member states
3. Contactless Student ID Cards
• USA Launch: 2018
• EU Full Availability: Not fully available in all EU member states

4. Sending Money through iMessage (Apple Cash)
• USA Launch: 2017 (iOS 11.2)
• EU Full Availability: Not available in the EU
5. Digital Car Keys
• USA Launch: 2020 (iOS 14)
• EU Full Availability: Not fully available in all EU member states
6. Tap to Pay
• USA Launch: 2022
• EU Full Availability: Not fully available in all EU member states (6/27)
7. EU ID Cards in Apple Wallet
• Functionality: Integration of digital ID cards from EU countries into Apple Wallet.
• EU Full Availability: Not available

 

[gregmancuso]

True, but switching banks and phone ecosystem is quite an ordeal for a lot of people, and most people won't do it.

It’s not just a matter of switching banks. Many people have multiple credit cards used for different purposes. The total credit line across cards is an important metric in credit worthiness calculations. Right now all my cards support Apple Pay. I routinely rotate the default card to ensure all banks get some love (and don’t reduce credit lines for lack of use - looking at you CapOne). And that does consider, as others have alluded, the fact that different cards provide different rewards and people routinely swipe to a non-default card for that purpose. To say ‘just close that account and get a different card’ is farcical.

My bigger concern is being forced to use Paze. 2/3rds of my card-issuing banks are already emailing daily to opt into that mess. I wan thing to do with anything thought up, design, and developed by the banks themselves.

 

[gregmancuso]

Open the right wallet before paying? Too complex?

Complex, no. Annoying, yes. Inconvenient, yes. Worse user experience, definitely. Less private, probably. More purchase details captured to profile / monetize me, of course.

Your comment, condescending!

 

[bradman83]

The issue is security, which the European regulators don't give a damn about as they are happy for dirty money and human traffickers to operate throughout the continent. Politicians like to take a cut of dirty money so allowing more p2p finance apps used by criminals helps grease their palms.

Stuff like this will happen more and more.

India's wildly popular payments system attracts scammers

Fast and free, India's UPI payments system has been a big success, but has attracted scammers.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is a fair point, but stuff like this already happens; existing, legitimate P2P networks in the US like PayPal, Venmo, Zelle, and Apple's own Apple Cash are rife with fraud and scammers (and I would assume the same is true elsewhere such as in India as the linked article notes). For as long as humans have figured out how to trade things of value people have figured out ways to scam them.

These are typically web-based scams so opening up NFC access really doesn't add any additional layers of risk. If anything it could be a security improvement; most NFC platforms are tokenized so if tapping in a face-to-face transaction it's much harder for a scammer to steal someone's account credentials or account ID.

 

[gregmancuso]

Opening up NFC access would mean it wouldn't need to have anything to do with the payment processor.

Transit cards in Apple Pay use NCF today. And, unlike credit cards, the number (card / member id, nfc identifiers) are static. Should only take defining loyalty cards as transit cards in AP. Of course, rebranding transit to ‘all things not-credit cards’ in Apple Pay would be better.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Even though there is a unification of interoperable payment systems, me, as a consumer, want to utilize Apple Pay and Apple Wallet in my life, I want all the services I pick to support that.

What I'm questioning is that through this openness, the developres have incentives to break this UX for me and may utilize their own systems for better control of their CRM and not to pay apple the 0,15% fee for transactions.

This has zero to do with consumers, this is a banking and payment system regulation.

In the broader protection of the consumer financially, EUC is not doing us consumers in favors in usability, and cleaner UX solutions.

EU doesn’t regulate UX. That’s a private matter. And consumer protection regarding consumer finance and payment systems, it’s completely unchanged as the current standard is still required.

so if one user (potential user) asks for interoperability do they have to enable it? or just if the EU decide to ask (not even with users requesting it)?

No. If 1 user or 10 million users are asking for it Apple won’t need to do anything.

it all seems so very vague really. I've worked in IT a long time. the worst dev projects always are the poorly spec'ed ones where the system owners can't clearly tell you what they want. the projects drag on and on and sign off is extremely challenging to get. it frustrates the dev team. it is a nightmare for test teams. and usually drags on so long everyone loses interest and it never saves money or adds the functionality people thought it would.

Read the damn paper first. The minimum requirements are clearly outlined. How it’s achieved is fully up to Apple.

any spec that includes the words "may" or "might" you should run a mile from...

Good that it doesn’t then.

The issue is security, which the European regulators don't give a damn about as they are happy for dirty money and human traffickers to operate throughout the continent. Politicians like to take a cut of dirty money so allowing more p2p finance apps used by criminals helps grease their palms.

Stuff like this will happen more and more.

India's wildly popular payments system attracts scammers

Fast and free, India's UPI payments system has been a big success, but has attracted scammers.

www.bbc.co.uk

Immagin if they could use apple pay like services instead of using the QR code system that was developed as an alternative approach.

Then this scaming problem of social engineering to fool people of their pin codes would not exist.

If Apple actually cared for people’s security they would allow others to use the secure payment system as a baseline 🤷‍♂️

And UPI is a payment system from India, Eu isn’t the ones who regulate Indians for how they use their system in India.

 

[gregmancuso]

This is what I don't understand. Everyone assumes that this will mean alternative wallets. Why not make the APIs available to add alternative NFC cards into the existing wallet? This is what it was designed for. After all, developers can add their own barcode cards into wallet, why not NFC cards?

They already can. Anything added to Apple Wallet has access to NFC. Apple showed people opening office doors with their phones and watches yeas ago. Transit cards can be added today and use NFC.

 

[gregmancuso]

Because this isn't about competition between iOS and Android, but competition between all kinds of services. Maybe someone can figure out a better service than Apple Wallet, maybe not, but at least there's the possibility, which will also keep Apple on their toes.

It's a convenient argument to say that if people wanted x, they would have just bought a different device, but I don't think that's how people actually make these decisions. Something like Apple Wallet is largely interchangeable with possible competition on either really new and innovative features, or alternatively where Apple Pay just isn't available in a specific country. No one is going to switch their device ecosystem because they really want to use Google Pay or Apple Pay. If you were forced to use an Android phone tomorrow you'd install Google Pay or Samsung Pay and you would probably go on to live your life just fine, hence there just isn't competition on an ecosystem level.

Apple Wallet, or any wallet really, is a basic utility. What about this will improve the user experience of using a wallet?

• Hold and select multiple credit cards - done
• Hold and select multiple transit cards (NFC) - done
• Hold and select multiple loyalty cards (bar code / QR code) - done
• Hold and select multiple loyalty’s cards (NFC) - possible but could use improvement)
• Support one-time use cards - done
• Show recent transaction in context of selected card - done
• Support government ID - done (in specific US states but delay in rollout is governmental delay not Wallet capability)

I’d really like to know what any single bank would do to equal or improve this. Or any bank-led consortium of their meneber banks? They are already trying with Paze. And all Paze appears to be is an updated CurrenC.

 

[surferfb]

EU doesn’t regulate UX. That’s a private matter. And consumer protection regarding consumer finance and payment systems, it’s completely unchanged as the current standard is still required.

They absolutely regulate UX. For example, the EU demands a browser selection screen, and also decides whether or not it is "good enough" after the fact. Which makes the device setup experience worse for end users, and now that Apple can't demand WebKit use, increases the chances that users download a browser that destroys battery life, which the end user will blame on Apple, not Chrome or whoever.

If you don't think the EU will eventually decide that Apple has to present a screen where users have to select which wallet you want to use, I have some oceanfront property in Austria you may be interested in.

No. If 1 user or 10 million users are asking for it Apple won’t need to do anything.

Absolutely false. They are required to give interoperability if requested by a competitor or "business user". See DMA text below.

The gatekeeper shall allow providers of services and providers of hardware, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same hardware and software features accessed or controlled via the operating system or virtual assistant listed in the designation decision pursuant to Article 3(9) as are available to services or hardware provided by the gatekeeper. Furthermore, the gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

They absolutely regulate UX. For example, the EU demands a browser selection screen, and also decides whether or not it is "good enough" after the fact. Which makes the device setup experience worse for end users, and now that Apple can't demand WebKit use, increases the chances that users download a browser that destroys battery life, which the end user will blame on Apple, not Chrome or whoever.

Users already have apps that drain their battery. And I understand your worries, but I fail to see why this is relevant. Users have personal responsibilities to what apps they install.

EU dictates the UI, not the UX. And I’m sorry but Apple have already made the device setup a nightmare long before EU came along asking for users to be allowed to chose their browser.

If you don't think the EU will eventually decide that Apple has to present a screen where users have to select which wallet you want to use, I have some oceanfront property in Austria you may be interested in.

First of Apple already have that for different things such as mail.

EU decided once upon a time that windows had a screen for choosing their browser. Now that’s gone.

Absolutely false. They are required to give interoperability if requested by a competitor or "business user". See DMA text below.

Business users are not consumers. And my assumption of your wording was related to private users and not business users.

If you actually meant businesses and not consumers then my mistake.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Apple Wallet, or any wallet really, is a basic utility. What about this will improve the user experience of using a wallet?

• Hold and select multiple credit cards - done
• Hold and select multiple transit cards (NFC) - done
• Hold and select multiple loyalty cards (bar code / QR code) - done
• Hold and select multiple loyalty’s cards (NFC) - possible but could use improvement)
• Support one-time use cards - done
• Show recent transaction in context of selected card - done
• Support government ID - done (in specific US states but delay in rollout is governmental delay not Wallet capability)

I’d really like to know what any single bank would do to equal or improve this. Or any bank-led consortium of their meneber banks? They are already trying with Paze. And all Paze appears to be is an updated CurrenC.

Well I would point to BankID or any number of eIDAS implementation in EU the last decade or so.

 

[dontwalkhand]

Or they could just accept EMV contactless payments at the fare gate (like London and many other cities do), and do away with the expense of maintaining their own fare cards and all the administration and maintenance costs that go along with them.

Certainly in Europe, with its low interchange fees, this is a reasonable option. (But of course, you do need to keep an alternative available for people who don't have credit/debit cards).

I think it is the transit agencies loving the extra "float" people keep on their accounts, allowing them to have extra money for rides not taken. There is really no more reason for this type of approach unless you're trying to upgrade an already existing bespoke system like LA's TAP.

 

[AppliedMicro]

Sounds like you are advocating for taking control away from consumers. Consumers shouldn’t have to switch banks to get Apple Pay

Quite the contrary.

I'm advocating for giving control back to consumers. Consumers shouldn't have to switch operating systems (and, by extension, app ecosystem, both of which they've often invested hundreds of Euros in), just to get NFC payments on their phone.

Consumers should have the power, not the businesses.

Exactly! So who constricts consumers' power here?

 

[AppliedMicro]

how odd that the biggest proponents of opening up iOS as per EU directives are the ones who complain the loudest when people suggest there is already a choice for open systems and they can go to Android devices... yet now when banks might make their own payment apps, they also loudly say "just change banks".

double standards?

Isn't it odd, how detractors of the DMA point to Android as a real alternative...
...yet also are among the first ones at pointing out how bad and untrustworthy Android/Google is?

Well, once there are open alternatives that are at least as good and trustworthy as iOS/Apple (just two or three suffice), I'll agree that Apple has all the right to operate a walled garden as they please.

At least there many more alternatives to choose among banks - than operating systems.

where is the proof that Apple does that now?

I didn't say they do.
But they're in a position to.

Proposing additional third-party payment infrastructure with so much potential for data aggregation a dubious argument when you're concerned about third parties' access to data.

 

[I7guy]

Isn't it odd, how detractors of the DMA point to Android as a real alternative...
...yet also are among the first ones at pointing out how bad and untrustworthy Android/Google is?

Competition even “ bad” competition is competition.

Well, once there are open alternatives that are at least as good and trustworthy as iOS/Apple (just two or three suffice), I'll agree that Apple has all the right to operate a walled garden as they please.

At least there many more alternatives to choose among banks - than operating systems.

I didn't say they do.
But they're in a position to.

Proposing additional third-party payment infrastructure with so much potential for data aggregation a dubious argument when you're concerned about third parties' access to data.

 

[wbeasley]

And yet, the biggest proponents of 'just switch to something else' seem to get cold feet at they suggestion they should change to something that works for them.

I frankly sympathise with you here, but I also still think that people don't switch ecosystems because of individual things. Relying on competition between ecosystems just doesn't always work on a service level.

I think if you could sympathise with that point of view we might get closer to a mutual understanding.

I'm not sure this is quite the same though.

Adding (forcing Apple to allow) alt apps stores and allowing alt payment is all optional to customers.
Allowing access to NFT and risking banks taking their ApplePay access method away and forcing customers to use a different bank authorised app for payments isnt going to be optional. it will be another app and disrupt the "all in one place" Wallet function that works conveniently.

Perhaps those who live currently under QR codes and not having everything in a Wallet dont see the benefits of double button pushing and selecting a payment option from your Watch or Phone. It's just so easy and streamlined. I dont want to lose that. It's simple and safe and proven. I wouldnt care if they gave them access to NFT on the proviso they also had to allow Wallet access as well. Then the customer can choose whether the bank app is better or not. Banks (in Australia) are getting worse. It's hard to speak to a person in branch or online with long wait times. They moved to tech solutions where you do everything yourself until issues arise.

 

[wbeasley]

Isn't it odd, how detractors of the DMA point to Android as a real alternative...
...yet also are among the first ones at pointing out how bad and untrustworthy Android/Google is?

Well, once there are open alternatives that are at least as good and trustworthy as iOS/Apple (just two or three suffice), I'll agree that Apple has all the right to operate a walled garden as they please.

At least there many more alternatives to choose among banks - than operating systems.

I didn't say they do.
But they're in a position to.

Proposing additional third-party payment infrastructure with so much potential for data aggregation a dubious argument when you're concerned about third parties' access to data.

"Allowing a banking app NFC access with its own apps cuts out the middleman (Apple) - a third party that gets access and is able to aggregate payment data on individual users basis across different payment providers/card used by that individual."

You are implying Apple aggregate data on people and use it because they have access to all your purchase data which individual banks are not able to do when all they see is their own card purchases.

Perhaps your wording should have been "and is POSSIBLY able to aggregate payment data".

Apple have never viewed customers as the product unlike some other tech companies who store and leverage every bit of data about you they have access too. The were the first to make apps disclose what personal data apps were accessing as well. Made some users question how much info they were giving to third parties.