How is NFC a game changer?

[PracticalMac]

NFC is not catching on.
Like SIM Credit cards (at least in USA)

Besides, NFC is a major security issue, anyone can snag your CC # wirelessly.

 

[CAWjr]

Awesome! How about when I sit in the theater I put together my order and tap my phone on my chair so they know EXACTLY where to bring it to me

Your sarcasm is thick, but there are theaters here in Atlanta that do exactly that. I'm not suggesting taking it that far. I'm saying that you place the order & pay through the app. You get a conformation that says "Your order is ready, come get it at register 5"

I'm not anti-NFC, but I'm not necessarily for implementing technology for the sake of implementing technology when it is not needed. While the use case is cool, implementing NFC/Passbook in it is superfluous.

 

[Kurso]

Guessing you haven't used Passbook before. You don't have to open any apps. It can appear on your lockscreen.

Ever seen a scanner? You know how they beep when you've scanned something? Yeah.

Scan and you have paid, ordered, and verified the location.

I have and it's clumsy, which is exactly what I'm trying to avoid when I buy an Apple product.

You can do this without NFC OR Passbook. Or just don't be a jerk and don't use your phone during a movie.

With the same elegance? I suppose I can count the rows and seats and hope I don't decide to move after. Or I can just tap.

And don't berate me for using my phone in the theater. Those Junior Mints are yours!!! ;-)

----------

Your sarcasm is thick, but there are theaters here in Atlanta that do exactly that. I'm not suggesting taking it that far. I'm saying that you place the order & pay through the app. You get a conformation that says "Your order is ready, come get it at register 5"

I'm not anti-NFC, but I'm not necessarily for implementing technology for the sake of implementing technology when it is not needed. While the use case is cool, implementing NFC/Passbook in it is superfluous.

Honestly I wasn't being sarcastic (I was excited because I thought we were getting closer to the same page). I've been to one of the new theaters where they serve a full menu during the movie. You tap this annoying giant red button, some guy shows up disrupting the movie. I want to do it before the movie.

 

[cynics]

NFC is not catching on.
Like SIM Credit cards (at least in USA)

Besides, NFC is a major security issue, anyone can snag your CC # wirelessly.

I think you overestimate the range of NFC. Direct contact is the absolute furthest I've been able to make it work. And in the circumstances I've used it the connect can only be established one at a time.

At this point I find it more secure then a normal credit cards. Only because it can be set by a PIN. If Apple had it and didn't change anything else it would require a finger print. So not only could no one else use it even with your phone you are much more likely to notice your phone missing then a credit card.

 

[PracticalMac]

I think you overestimate the range of NFC. Direct contact is the absolute furthest I've been able to make it work. And in the circumstances I've used it the connect can only be established one at a time.

At this point I find it more secure then a normal credit cards. Only because it can be set by a PIN. If Apple had it and didn't change anything else it would require a finger print. So not only could no one else use it even with your phone you are much more likely to notice your phone missing then a credit card.

What phone, Samsung?
Suggest the range is highly constrained, then again it could be interference from phone itself.

I cant see why one phone cant display a bar code for other to read and sync up that way. While Samsung is trying something for easier connectivity (more then Apple IMHO), I am not at all impressed with the quality of technology.

 

[zync]

I didn't skirt it at all but if you are really interested in what kiosks I log into...

You did actually, or you wouldn't have needed to make the following list.

Airport checkin
Library book checkout
Hotel checkin
Movie theater tickets
Safeway self checkout or Home Depot (the two most common ones I interact with)
Bank ATMs
Security checkpoints (many customers I visit have checkin kiosks)
NYC subway pass when I visit well... NYC
My dry cleaner has a ticket scanning kiosk to bring your clothes to the front (I hate losing those things)
Garage parking
Redbox
Photo kiosk at Walgreens
Sprint kiosk in the movie theater (free popcorn, yum)
Gas pumps (yep, those are kiosks)
The damn kiosk at the Verizon store that I can never remember my password to... grrr

Half of those don't require any sort of "login." Payment doesn't equate to login—at least connotatively. When I swipe my credit card no one would say I'm logging in.

And—though irrelevant—gas pumps are not kiosks just because you pay money at them. A kiosk generally offers site specific information, or attends to services. While a gas pump delivers a service, it's main goal is as a POS terminal.

Most of these things are far easier with Passbook anyway as you can just do it without having to take your phone to any specific place—like airport check-in.

I've used the Apple Store app to buy things before. It's cool but awkward and I believe you are thinking about a unidimensional system instead of multi dimensional system.

In the case of the Apple Store app you walk in preselect your items, scan them and pay. It is a single system (the Apple payment system).

Now, think of it in terms of multiple instances of a system, an ATM for example. I want money. I not only need to identify myself to the bank and I need the bank to know which ATM to spit the money out of. NFC is capable of connecting those two things (my identity and the instance of the system I want to interact with) in a seamless way.

The Apple store doesn't rely on passbook actually. So there's no difference with your example. I don't know where you get this "unidimensional" or "multidimensional" BS, but if you had any idea about how payment transactions and large databases are handled, you'd know that NFC and Passbook are effectively the same. In both cases, all they do is facilitate passing your identification and authorization to a bank. Neither NFC nor Passbook link ANYTHING together but the thing you are interacting with and your ID.

Other systems handle all of the other details. The store handles what product or service you're paying for and keeps its own record of that (which is often sent out to other companies to warehouse). The store charges your payment account, you provide identification (an account) and authorization (PIN/scan/tap) and the bank handles the transaction.

If anything, NFC is more "unidimensional" than anything because you actually have to be present in the location to remit payment. Passbook itself also requires that. However, mobile apps may not. Though, in nearly all cases, you must present proof of purchase at some point.

And I don't really think you understand how ATMs work. First, they're site specific. They know where to spit out money because you can only exist in one place at a time. It's not like anyone ever pre-orders cash from an ATM and picks it up across town.

Now, Passbook can bring up the specific app based on a location. What does Passbook do when you are in a convenience store (which you may want to use an app to pay at) but it has an ATM inside. Which app does it bring up?

If such a situation occurred, it'd bring up both.

NFC is more fundamental than Passbook. NFC is a technology Passbook may leverage in the future. Understand the difference?

There is no difference. The only difference is with interaction. In both use cases the user must be present to pay for a good. In each case the user has a specific ID that identifies them to the systems at play. The ONLY difference is in interaction. In one, you touch your phone to something. In another, you scan your phone. The end result is the same.

Again, apples and oranges (no pun intended). Why is it a question of BT vs. NFC. BT serves a different purpose today with a very different design. When I walk up to a kiosk or some system I want to interact with I don't want to 'pair' my phone to it. I want that setup to be natural. NFC enables this be ensuring the communication distance is so short that with a high degree of certainty setup can be implied.

BT may evolve to this with a different set of standards but the point is it's not something the iPhone supports today and there are endless use cases for it.

I disagree. Bluetooth was just an example and not all versions of Bluetooth require pairing. It could be replaced with scanning the phone. Scanning a phone requires no pairing.

The only difference in use case are applications which cannot use a scanner but must resort to a radio frequency of some sort. But Bluetooth and P2P WiFi can both handle those cases quite well.

"You can tap to pay using the Google Wallet app on select NFC-enabled Android phones anywhere contactless payments are accepted, which includes over 200,000 merchant locations in the United States."

/thread

/thread? Seriously? 200,000 isn't that many. There are approximately 121,000 gas stations in the country. If each pump has one, there would already be more than that figure. So really, that's not a high adoption rate. Even if they all averaged to having just one per location, you're still halfway there. There are 14,000 McDonald's in America too. With only McDonald's and gas stations, we've covered 68% of that figure. YMMV (pun intended) but I rarely go to McDonald's and I almost never go inside the gas station. So it's likely that I'm not even seeing 68% of it. Perhaps I'm not the normal American, but I never see more than a few people walk into the station. McDonald's probably has a higher rate of traffic by their NFC devices. And that's only because it's on the drive through window too.

And again, you have not shown a single case where NFC works and no other technology can. Why? Because there isn't one. With the right sensors, any of these technologies can mimic the "wonders" of NFC. And all of the rest are already found in the iPhone, and many of them work better (like flight check-in which could just be done inside the airport instead of having to go to a kiosk).

If there's a /thread it's there.

I should also note that I would like to see its adoption rate increase, but I'd rather have passbook, since it's easier and quicker to implement because most of the equipment is already available. Only back end systems need to be modified (and not even in all cases).

 

[zync]

I think you overestimate the range of NFC. Direct contact is the absolute furthest I've been able to make it work. And in the circumstances I've used it the connect can only be established one at a time.

At this point I find it more secure then a normal credit cards. Only because it can be set by a PIN. If Apple had it and didn't change anything else it would require a finger print. So not only could no one else use it even with your phone you are much more likely to notice your phone missing then a credit card.

My friend was telling me his phone had a range of 30 ft for NFC, but I could be mistaken.

 

[zedzded]

There are so many in these forums saying that NFC not being in the iPhone is yet another miss for Apple. It makes me wonder how this will truly be used.

I get the use of NFC to be able to waive you phone to use your credit card (which some would say passbook can serve the same purpose if adoption were to increase), but what are the other applications for NFC that would truly change your life?

This is a serious question. Not trolling at all. I just don't see the widespread multifunctional use of NFC that causes people to get upset every time a new device is released without it.

So Apple neglect to use NFC and it's laughed off by the fanboys as being useless technology, but the addition of 64 bit has them all jizzing themselves, irrespective of the fact that the Iphone will not be able to utilise 64 bit technology at all.. oh the irony...

 

[zync]

So Apple neglect to use NFC and it's laughed off by the fanboys as being useless technology, but the addition of 64 bit has them all jizzing themselves, irrespective of the fact that the Iphone will not be able to utilise 64 bit technology at all.. oh the irony...

It's useless for most of us because we don't encounter NFC frequently and because the same use cases can be provided for with even older technology—at less inconvenience to businesses.

And how will the iPhone not be able to utilize 64-bit technology? Where do you even get that? They rewrote the default apps to be 64-bit, and they even demoed a game that utilizes it. Being able to address more than 4GB of RAM isn't the ONLY use for 64-bit you know. It has a lot to do with the instruction set used.

Not all apps will benefit, but some will. And speed increase is good, even if it only helps certain computationally intensive apps.

 

[matttye]

Bluetooth Low Energy is much more flexible than NFC.

The only disadvantage of BLE over NFC is that tags need a power source (which can be a tiny battery but still drives up the cost).

----------

NFC is not catching on.
Like SIM Credit cards (at least in USA)

Besides, NFC is a major security issue, anyone can snag your CC # wirelessly.

It's not really a big security issue in smartphones. Maybe contactless cards - which are always on.

When a smartphone's screen is off, so is the NFC radio. Plus, people would only be able to snag your CC # wirelessly while you're actually in the process of making the payment. Even if the screen was on and you were just randomly playing games, the phone wouldn't be transmitting your CC # via NFC for no apparent reason; it will only do that when you're in an app and about to make a payment.

There's about as much risk as someone watching you enter your PIN and snatching your card, or just snatching your contactless card.

 

[Kurso]

Half of those don't require any sort of "login." Payment doesn't equate to login—at least connotatively. When I swipe my credit card no one would say I'm logging in.

'Logging in' means a system identifying you with varying degrees of certainty, usually for the purpose of providing some service based on who you are.

Example: inserting a credit card into a gas pump and getting gas in return. It must be John Doe because it is his credit card. It is a low degree of certain, which is why they ask for zip code now, but you have logged in. Now, they will give you gas up to a certain threshold which may be capped by your specific credit limit.

This is 100% the definition of 'logging in', but I can see how one can believe if you don't have a user name and password they might think they haven't logged in. A quick computer science class will correct that.

And—though irrelevant—gas pumps are not kiosks just because you pay money at them. A kiosk generally offers site specific information, or attends to services. While a gas pump delivers a service, it's main goal is as a POS terminal.

Once again, a very limited view of the world. Kiosks offer site specific info like the price of gas at the pump I'm standing at? Or, pitching me the day old hot dogs inside the store? The station I go to has the news running on the pump.

Horses to cars my friend... You are talking about what you see instead of what exists elsewhere in the world or what is possible.

The Apple store doesn't rely on passbook actually. So there's no difference with your example. I don't know where you get this "unidimensional" or "multidimensional" BS, but if you had any idea about how payment transactions and large databases are handled, you'd know that NFC and Passbook are effectively the same. In both cases, all they do is facilitate passing your identification and authorization to a bank. Neither NFC nor Passbook link ANYTHING together but the thing you are interacting with and your ID.

I know exactly how payment transactions are handled, in painful detail, which is why I chuckled when you said it's not 'logging in' when you pay for something. And yes, NFC does 'link' you to a VERY specific location. NFC, over time will enable Password to be more elegant.

Also, just because you don't understand a concept doesn't mean it is "BS". You interact with multidimensional systems every single day.

If anything, NFC is more "unidimensional" than anything because you actually have to be present in the location to remit payment. Passbook itself also requires that. However, mobile apps may not. Though, in nearly all cases, you must present proof of purchase at some point.

NFC, like many technologies serves a very specific purpose. In the case of NFC it is a very short range mechanism. That short range is the advantage it offers. It complements other technologies very nicely for the same reason we have satellite service but also terrestrial radio. Or terrestrial radio but also cellular. Cellular but also Wi-fi. Wi-Fi but also Bluetooth. Bluetooth but also NFC..... They all serve a slightly different purpose.

And I don't really think you understand how ATMs work. First, they're site specific. They know where to spit out money because you can only exist in one place at a time. It's not like anyone ever pre-orders cash from an ATM and picks it up across town.

I understand how ATMs work. Have you ever been to a site that has more than one ATM? If I'm standing in line waiting for the one of the ATMs free up why wouldn't I want to queue my transaction? Or, lets say someone is disabled and its less than convenient to get out of the car. They could authorize a predetermined transaction without handing over a PIN.

But you are focusing on a single use case when there are endless examples of multidimensional systems that having a very short signaling mechanism would be enormously beneficial.

If such a situation occurred, it'd bring up both.

Exactly my point.

There is no difference. The only difference is with interaction. In both use cases the user must be present to pay for a good. In each case the user has a specific ID that identifies them to the systems at play. The ONLY difference is in interaction. In one, you touch your phone to something. In another, you scan your phone. The end result is the same.

Mac and PC bring me to the internet so there must be no difference? Apple is a company that cares more about the process than the end result. In fact they define themselves by this methodology. It matters.

I disagree. Bluetooth was just an example and not all versions of Bluetooth require pairing. It could be replaced with scanning the phone. Scanning a phone requires no pairing.

The only difference in use case are applications which cannot use a scanner but must resort to a radio frequency of some sort. But Bluetooth and P2P WiFi can both handle those cases quite well.

No they can't. Once again if there are multiple instances of a service to interact with how does BT of Wi-fi help? Which cash register am I paying at? Which pump is supposed to give me gas? What machine is supposed to spit out out ticket? Which parking meter is supposed to add time? Which vending machine is supposed to give me a Coke?

The range of BT (yes even BLE) and Wi-Fi is not designed to meet these needs. NFC is.

/thread? Seriously? 200,000 isn't that many. There are approximately 121,000 gas stations in the country. If each pump has one, there would already be more than that figure. So really, that's not a high adoption rate. Even if they all averaged to having just one per location, you're still halfway there. There are 14,000 McDonald's in America too. With only McDonald's and gas stations, we've covered 68% of that figure. YMMV (pun intended) but I rarely go to McDonald's and I almost never go inside the gas station. So it's likely that I'm not even seeing 68% of it. Perhaps I'm not the normal American, but I never see more than a few people walk into the station. McDonald's probably has a higher rate of traffic by their NFC devices. And that's only because it's on the drive through window too.

It's only been three years since the first Android phone started supporting NFC and there are millions of readers across the globe.

And again, you have not shown a single case where NFC works and no other technology can. Why? Because there isn't one. With the right sensors, any of these technologies can mimic the "wonders" of NFC. And all of the rest are already found in the iPhone, and many of them work better (like flight check-in which could just be done inside the airport instead of having to go to a kiosk).

There is a difference between the use case existing and you understanding the use case. Your understanding of the use case isn't necessary for adoption to continue because every day new consumers have access to NFC and new NFC are rolled out.

I should also note that I would like to see its adoption rate increase, but I'd rather have passbook, since it's easier and quicker to implement because most of the equipment is already available. Only back end systems need to be modified (and not even in all cases).

Again, the fact that you say you would rather have Passbook over NFC indicated you don't really understand the different. In the case I stated where you admitted two Passbook apps would come up NFC would enable you to walk up to the register and without opening the app enable Passbook to bring up the right application. You might even enable an implied authorization if you really wanted too.

NFC and Passbook are NOT the same thing.

 

[zync]

...nothing here worth quoting...

I chuckled throughout your entire post. Thanks!

I never said that NFC = Passbook. Passbook > NFC. 90% of the things you like about NFC aren't even NFC related. NFC only encompasses the connection itself. That's like saying bluetooth is the internet.

And yes, you are presenting identification when paying for anything that isn't cash-based. But YOU are not logging in. There is a log in behind the scenes but ABSOLUTELY NO ONE calls paying at a gas pump (which NO ONE calls a kiosk), logging in. Yes, functionally they are the same, but you are not logging in.

Hey John, yeah, sorry I'm late. I was just logging in at the gas station.

I did say NFC links you to a specific location. So does passbook. It REQUIRES a scan to provide proof of purchase or coupon or whatever. THAT is how you can identify which ATM you interact with. Functionally, there is no difference. That's the point. Whether your phone is scanned optically, or via RF is irrelevant, just like your entire post.

Again, there are no use cases (this is not my opinion but a fact) that says otherwise. If there were you would have surely presented it by now. I welcome you to do so.

I should also note that I argued about your figure of terminals in the US and then you talk about globally. It's a moving target with you because your argument doesn't have a foundation.

 

[Kurso]

I chuckled throughout your entire post. Thanks!

Yes, you are presenting identification when paying for anything that isn't cash-based. But YOU are not logging in. There is a log in behind the scenes but ABSOLUTELY NO ONE calls paying at a gas pump (which NO ONE calls a kiosk), logging in. Yes, functionally they are the same, but you are not logging in.

Hey John, yeah, sorry I'm late. I was just logging in at the gas station.

I did say NFC links you to a specific location. So does passbook. It REQUIRES a scan to provide proof of purchase or coupon or whatever. THAT is how you can identify which ATM you interact with. Functionally, there is no difference. That's the point. Whether your phone is scanned optically, or via RF is irrelevant, just like your entire post.

Again, there are no use cases (this is not my opinion but a fact) that says otherwise. If there were you would have surely presented it by now. I welcome you to do so.

The user may not consider it logging in but isn't that the point? Simplify the user experience so that the things that don't matter to the user disappear? The user is without a doubt logging in, they just don't know it. Ask any computer scientist and they will tell you the same thing.

But you have just made my point perfectly. At the gas pump the user is logging in but they don't know it. Why? User experience. They swipe a card and are done. Now compare scanning the screen of your phone vs. tapping.

User experience; this IS Apple.

It doesn't take much of an imagination to think of how NFC could simplify the user experience WITH Passbook. Tap twice on the FP sensor to authorize the transaction requested over NFC, which could identify the App automatically if you wanted it too.

That is what NFC comes down to, enabling a better user experience for a number of use cases.

 

[zync]

But you have just made my point perfectly.

Ditto. My point was actually that that's not considered logging in. But anyway, tapping your phone to something and scanning the phone are both Apple like in my opinion—especially since one has the potential to do things without interaction (like airport check-in).

I'm not saying that NFC shouldn't exist or isn't a cool technology. I'm just saying that it duplicates features that already existed. I would have liked for it to be in the iPhone, but it's absence doesn't make a difference to me.

 

[Kurso]

Ditto. My point was actually that that's not considered logging in. But anyway, tapping your phone to something and scanning the phone are both Apple like in my opinion—especially since one has the potential to do things without interaction (like airport check-in).

I'm not saying that NFC shouldn't exist or isn't a cool technology. I'm just saying that it duplicates features that already existed. I would have liked for it to be in the iPhone, but it's absence doesn't make a difference to me.

It doesn't matter if the user considers it logging in. It IS logging in.

And airport checkin can be just as simple if not more so with NFC. I more than likely get my boarding pass online before I get there but sometimes I don't.

I walk up to a kiosk tap my phone. Maybe the kiosk tells my phone the name of the Passbook app it needs to validate through. I haven't even turned on the screen yet. This gets ugly with BLE or Wi-Fi unless I want to advertise to every kiosk in the area (and I don't) that I'm John Doe and I'm looking for my boarding pass.

Regardless of how I get my boarding pass (maybe I used cellular in the cab on the way over) I now to to prove to security that I have one. Once again I tap my phone. The airport scanner tells my phone, via NFC, that it needs my boarding pass. Passbook says 'I've got it' and transmits it, again without ever turning the screen on.

Some people want to turn the screen on, find the right app and turn the phone around to face the scanner. I get it, more power to you. I'm not one of those people. NFC can offer me a more elegant experience.

 

[zync]

It doesn't matter if the user considers it logging in. It IS logging in.

And airport checkin can be just as simple if not more so with NFC. I more than likely get my boarding pass online before I get there but sometimes I don't.

I walk up to a kiosk tap my phone. Maybe the kiosk tells my phone the name of the Passbook app it needs to validate through. I haven't even turned on the screen yet. This gets ugly with BLE or Wi-Fi unless I want to advertise to every kiosk in the area (and I don't) that I'm John Doe and I'm looking for my boarding pass.

Regardless of how I get my boarding pass (maybe I used cellular in the cab on the way over) I now to to prove to security that I have one. Once again I tap my phone. The airport scanner tells my phone, via NFC, that it needs my boarding pass. Passbook says 'I've got it' and transmits it, again without ever turning the screen on.

Some people want to turn the screen on, find the right app and turn the phone around to face the scanner. I get it, more power to you. I'm not one of those people. NFC can offer me a more elegant experience.

The case I'm thinking of is actually simpler. We'll start from check-in. You walk into the airport, find your kiosk, and scan your phone. Cool. Some people want to find a kiosk, I get that. You have your pass and scan your phone at security.

I walk in, the airport is geofenced in my app. When I arrive, it knows I'm there, and automatically sends the final pass to my phone which I scan at security by swiping on the lock screen and presenting it.

And paying with a card is not logging in. You are merely providing identification and authorization for a transaction. You have no further interaction with the computer or network, which is the purpose of logging in. You provide the info and an authentication is made server side and the request is handled, but that session is terminated at the POS. You're not logging in.

They are similar, but not equal. And colloquially there is a major difference and far less similarity.

 

[deeddawg]

This is what happens when a company(Samsung) that throws features in a phone for the sake of market share.

You mean like an ambient temperature sensor built into a small device that generates heat when used?

 

[Kurso]

The case I'm thinking of is actually simpler. We'll start from check-in. You walk into the airport, find your kiosk, and scan your phone. Cool. Some people want to find a kiosk, I get that. You have your pass and scan your phone at security.

I walk in, the airport is geofenced in my app. When I arrive, it knows I'm there, and automatically sends the final pass to my phone which I scan at security by swiping on the lock screen and presenting it.

Sometimes people check bags, sometimes they forget to checking online. People use kiosks. Use cases...

Again, why do you want to unlock your phone make sure its on the right screen and then align it with a scanner? Just explain why you feel this is more elegant than a single tap of the phone! I don't pull out my credit card and interacte with it in some way before I swipe it... We could but that would break the user experience.

And paying with a card is not logging in. You are merely providing identification and authorization for a transaction. You have no further interaction with the computer or network, which is the purpose of logging in. You provide the info and an authentication is made server side and the request is handled, but that session is terminated at the POS. You're not logging in.

They are similar, but not equal. And colloquially there is a major difference and far less similarity.

Just because it happens as part of a unified transaction does not mean it is not logging in. You are providing your credentials and the system (in this case the bank) is providing a service based on those credentials. Just because the user does not see it does not mean they are not logging in.

For example - If I enter a username and password into my computer, send an email and them log off does that mean I have not logged in? I'm only doing one thing. Now, if I write a script that, when I enter a user name and password, the computer automatically sends and email in the background and then logs me out does that mean I haven't logged in? If, instead of a password I have a finger printer sensor that authenticates me and send the email have I logged in?

In fact, my email app had stored my credentials for the email server. Do that mean I haven't logged in to it when I hit send? You can argue the user does not know they are logging in (and I agree with this) but they are.

 

[Lucille Carter]

You mean like an ambient temperature sensor built into a small device that generates heat when used?

or gives you your pocket temperature

 

[zync]

Sometimes people check bags, sometimes they forget to checking online. People use kiosks. Use cases...

Again, why do you want to unlock your phone make sure its on the right screen and then align it with a scanner? Just explain why you feel this is more elegant than a single tap of the phone! I don't pull out my credit card and interacte with it in some way before I swipe it... We could but that would break the user experience.

I am more likely to come across something to scan my phone optically. I'm not opposed to tapping it. It's nice. But it's barely more convenient. I'm already holding the phone. It's barely any more effort to swipe and scan than just scan.

Just because it happens as part of a unified transaction does not mean it is not logging in. You are providing your credentials and the system (in this case the bank) is providing a service based on those credentials. Just because the user does not see it does not mean they are not logging in.

For example - If I enter a username and password into my computer, send an email and them log off does that mean I have not logged in? I'm only doing one thing. Now, if I write a script that, when I enter a user name and password, the computer automatically sends and email in the background and then logs me out does that mean I haven't logged in? If, instead of a password I have a finger printer sensor that authenticates me and send the email have I logged in?

In fact, my email app had stored my credentials for the email server. Do that mean I haven't logged in to it when I hit send? You can argue the user does not know they are logging in (and I agree with this) but they are.

You are providing info with no further interaction on your part. Nothing else is occurring client-side. You're not sending an email. You're not performing an action on the server. It is performing an action and that is all. The terminal you interact with is your avatar. It logs in. But you do not.

So yes, you are interacting with a remote computer via a local terminal. And if this were 1970, they would consider that logging in. But in 2013, no one considers that sort of transaction logging in. No one says they logged in to buy some gas.

 

[Geckotek]

Payment
Physical key replacement - door, car, hotel room, etc...
File transfer - I'm not excited about this use case but some are because the micro range is considered more secure
Replace QR code - No more taking pictures of barcodes
Single sign on - OpenID or otherwise.

In essence, being able to identify yourself without having to explicitly interact and setup with the other system.

I've seen many of these things accomplished w/o NFC. I opened my Zipcar the other day w/o NFC. I pay for my coffee every day from my iPhone...no NFC. It's easy to transfer files...no NFC involved. Single sign on? Not sure how NFC helps that either.

 

[JulianL]

It's not like anyone ever pre-orders cash from an ATM and picks it up across town.

Customers of Natwest bank in the UK can do exactly that. They pre-order the cash using a Natwest app on a mobile phone and can then go to an ATM and collect it by typing in a one-time code. The ATM needs to be from certain banks so it's possible it might be on the other side of town. The feature is intended for people who lose their wallet or forget their ATM card and need emergency cash.

 

[Kurso]

I am more likely to come across something to scan my phone optically. I'm not opposed to tapping it. It's nice. But it's barely more convenient. I'm already holding the phone. It's barely any more effort to swipe and scan than just scan.

Yes, and a long time ago you were more likely to find a horse trough than a gas station. Technology progresses. There are use cases where scanners will not make sense or use experiences that we want to optimize. i.e. hotel doors, which is why they are slowly migrating to NFC or gas pumps which want to emulate the simple action of a swipe of a card.

In fact the only reason scanning is even remotely useful is because we have bar code scanners in place on many system, not because it is a better user experience. Yet despite the number of barcode scanner in the market we are STILL moving ahead with NFC.

But now that you agree tapping is more convenient we can move on.

You are providing info with no further interaction on your part. Nothing else is occurring client-side. You're not sending an email. You're not performing an action on the server. It is performing an action and that is all. The terminal you interact with is your avatar. It logs in. But you do not.

So yes, you are interacting with a remote computer via a local terminal. And if this were 1970, they would consider that logging in. But in 2013, no one considers that sort of transaction logging in. No one says they logged in to buy some gas.

Again, you are talking about perception vs. reality. Just because there is no further interaction does not indicate you are not logging in. If I walk up to a computer and provide my credentials and then walk away are you suggesting that I have not logged in?

What you are describing is the perception as a user that you are not logging in. In fact you are logging in. The application abstracts that login to provide a better experience.

----------

Customers of Natwest bank in the UK can do exactly that. They pre-order the cash using a Natwest app on a mobile phone and can then go to an ATM and collect it by typing in a one-time code. The ATM needs to be from certain banks so it's possible it might be on the other side of town. The feature is intended for people who lose their wallet or forget their ATM card and need emergency cash.

Thats a cool use case.

Growing up I had a friend that would run to the ATM for his mother all the time to get cash (she was rather large so she didn't like getting out of the car). He would swipe two transactions, one for the cash he wanted and one for the cash she wanted and hand here the transaction receipt for the latter.

Bad kid, he was always getting in trouble.

With what you describe she could give him a onetime use code,or preauth with NFC touch ;-) for a specific transaction without having access to the PIN, rest of the account or even the rest of the phone.

Possibilities are endless. I love technology.

----------

I've seen many of these things accomplished w/o NFC. I opened my Zipcar the other day w/o NFC. I pay for my coffee every day from my iPhone...no NFC. It's easy to transfer files...no NFC involved. Single sign on? Not sure how NFC helps that either.

Why did you rent a Zipcar instead of going to Hertz?

 

[zync]

Yes, and a long time ago you were more likely to find a horse trough than a gas station. Technology progresses. There are use cases where scanners will not make sense or use experiences that we want to optimize. i.e. hotel doors, which is why they are slowly migrating to NFC or gas pumps which want to emulate the simple action of a swipe of a card.

Or you could just use an app, like I use for the alarm on my office, to unlock and lock without having to even be at the door. No scanning required.

In fact the only reason scanning is even remotely useful is because we have bar code scanners in place on many system, not because it is a better user experience. Yet despite the number of barcode scanner in the market we are STILL moving ahead with NFC.

But now that you agree tapping is more convenient we can move on.

And we're still moving ahead with apps, passbook, and scanning. As for convenience? No, not really. It isn't inconvenient to have to swipe on my screen first.

I agree that it's a smidge simpler, but it's in no way less convenient to anyone with a shred of dexterity.

Again, you are talking about perception vs. reality. Just because there is no further interaction does not indicate you are not logging in. If I walk up to a computer and provide my credentials and then walk away are you suggesting that I have not logged in?

What you are describing is the perception as a user that you are not logging in. In fact you are logging in. The application abstracts that login to provide a better experience.

Actually, I'm talking about semantics—which are important in this case. No one calls paying at a terminal logging in. What happens actually is irrelevant. That's the only issue I have with your statement in this regard.

And your example is flawed. Leaving a terminal that you CAN do something else at if you choose to is different than a transaction where there is no other possibility to do anything else.

I'm not saying no log in takes place. I'm simply saying that it is different than the contemporary concept of logging in, which is why no one calls it that. For example, no one logs into their phone with a passcode, they unlock it.

Possibilities are endless. I love technology.

Why did you rent a Zipcar instead of going to Hertz?

Why would you suggest technology advancing and then rip on someone for renting a Zipcar instead of going to Hertz. Hertz is archaic compared to Zipcar.

 

[zync]

Customers of Natwest bank in the UK can do exactly that. They pre-order the cash using a Natwest app on a mobile phone and can then go to an ATM and collect it by typing in a one-time code. The ATM needs to be from certain banks so it's possible it might be on the other side of town. The feature is intended for people who lose their wallet or forget their ATM card and need emergency cash.

I meant that no one orders cash at an ATM and it spits it out immediately. You still have to be there to get it with some sort of verification.

The original argument Kurso was making was how would the ATM know which ATM you wished to interact with via passbook, so I said it's not like people are using ATMs across the city (where I live anyway, most places don't have more than one ATM at a specific location—even banks).

Even in your case, they still have to verify themselves at a specific ATM, it's just that the key is easily transferable because you don't need someone's phone.

Temporary pins and logins, and whatever are cool because they allow others to be your agents. It's nice. I wish that existed in more places—not this specific thing but temporary validation. It'd be nice to be able to supply a number and have someone act on your behalf temporarily without having to jump through hoops with driver licenses etc.