Earlier comment retracted. I realized you were referring to this convoluted ExxonMobile process vs true in-store Apple Pay.
Agreed, this is fairly high-friction. Being able to pay while still in the car, and the added security of paying with this vs using a card that could be skimmed, only slightly makes up for the friction of having to fumble your way to the app.
[doublepost=1457472066][/doublepost]
The new "chip and signature" cards are actually much slower than traditional credit cards and much, much slower than Apple Pay in my experience. All my cards are chip-based now, and most retailers around me accept them. Rather than the 5 seconds it takes to swipe my traditional card and type in my pin, the "chip and signature" card seems to take on average 25 seconds to authorize the transaction (and then I need to sign). The implementation is quite slow.
The signature requirement is irritating. I would vastly prefer the pin, as that's a second factor in the authorization (the signature isn't -- you can sign anything and it won't prevent the transaction). I think the reason the U.S. market doesn't use it might be related to the average American having so many credit cards. Can you imagine how often grocery store lines would be held up by someone exclaiming "I don't remember my pin!" But this lack of a pin requirement makes it far less secure; lose your card and there are no protections.
Apple Pay, on the other hand, is incredibly friction-free and takes, literally, 2-3 seconds.