Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple has Tap to pay with card functionality. (Receive card payment on iPhone)But, being Apple, it is not easy for a POS system manufacturers to include it easily. There are apps which small companies can use to receive payments. Card readers work with Apple since the beginning of App Store but when it comes to Tap to pay, Apple is hard to work with
 
Funny how you're worried about less options for consumers when it means less $ for Apple, but when Apple blocked others from accessing the NFC chip you didn't appear to be concerned about how that reduced options for consumers. Why is that?
How about those "options" try and innovate on their own rather than riding Apple's coattails?
 
How about those "options" try and innovate on their own rather than riding Apple's coattails?
If giving PayPal and others access the to NFC chip is them riding Apple's coat tails, then so is allowing Instagram, TikTok, or your bank (for mobile check deposit) access to the camera, or Spotify, YouTube, and Netflix access to the audio chip or display.

These should be considered core components of the iPhone and everyone should have access to them if they're not being used for nefarious reasons.
 
Funny how you're worried about less options for consumers when it means less $ for Apple, but when Apple blocked others from accessing the NFC chip you didn't appear to be concerned about how that reduced options for consumers. Why is that?
Consumers should buy the products they like. If consumers really objected to Apple Pay being the only option, they should buy a manufacturer that gives them the functionality they want.
 
Consumers should buy the products they like. If consumers really objected to Apple Pay being the only option, they should buy a manufacturer that gives them the functionality they want.

Yes because people make their choice of phone platform based on one minor service restriction. OTOH Apple could always not trade in the EU if they don't like it.
 
That’s a big drawback. A fragment nfc pay system whereby Apple Pay may not be supported in the future. Less options for consumers.
Consumers should buy the products they like. If consumers really objected to Apple Pay being the only option, they should buy a manufacturer that gives them the functionality they want.
Consumers should use the NFC payment system they like. If one system doesn't support Apple Pay, vote with your wallet and use something else / go somewhere else.
 
It works 😃
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2042.jpeg
    IMG_2042.jpeg
    68.4 KB · Views: 26
I am living in the EU and I despise EU's digital regulation, directed only against US Tech companies. I opted many years ago for Apple's wallet garden, otherwise I would have bought an Android.
Apple Pay now is widely accepted in Germany and it works great, I pay nearly everything with my Apple watch. No need for PayPal on my side. (I use PayPal online.)
None of the EU regulations are specific to US Tech companies. The same rules apply to all companies. In some cases, the company must fall into the gatekeeper designation (or something like this) for certain rules to apply but, again, the rules are the same for all companies.
 
None of the EU regulations are specific to US Tech companies. The same rules apply to all companies. In some cases, the company must fall into the gatekeeper designation (or something like this) for certain rules to apply but, again, the rules are the same for all companies.
Technically, you’re correct, but the gatekeeper definition was clearly written to ensure American companies would be hit and EU companies wouldn’t.
 
Isn’t that how a consumer normally purchases products? Evaluate the product. Prioritize the features. Decide on the negatives and Make a decision.

No. Often it's a trade off they may not like certain aspects of the product but buy anyway.

The more abusive parts of Apple and Google's business are currently being litigated so things are likely to get better as far as consumer choice goes.
 
Technically, you’re correct, but the gatekeeper definition was clearly written to ensure American companies would be hit and EU companies wouldn’t.
Are you saying that European companies are underregulated? That's not correct. The fact is that Europe just does not have the large tech companies to speak of. Does it mean that they should not regulate big tech? Besides, all these US tech companies have registered businesses in EU. Where they are headquartered does not really matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RolandGo and klasma
Are you saying that European companies are underregulated? That's not correct. The fact is that Europe just does not have the large tech companies to speak of. Does it mean that they should not regulate big tech? Besides, all these US tech companies have registered businesses in EU. Where they are headquartered does not really matter.
No, not saying European are under regulated, if anything the opposite. But the DMA was written to purposely avoid European companies. You said it applied to all companies equally - I was just clarifying to note that’s only half true.

The European Parliament’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) report on the DMA, explicitly advocated for changing the DMA’s thresholds to keep U.S. firms within scope while exempting most EU competitors - which led to amendments to the DMA. The report's author, Andreas Schwab, a German MEP, suggested the DMA should "unquestionably" target only the five biggest U.S. firms.

Anyways - that’s off topic for this thread and I don’t want to get pulled into another DMA debate so I will leave it at that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: com.B
Another European country telling America company what to do! Man usa is a loosing
If an American company wants to do business in the EU, then they have to follow the E.U rules. Apple can always so now and pull out of the E.U.
this s the same when any company who wants to do business in any country, they follow the rules of that country, don't like it, then go elsewhere.
 
No, not saying European are under regulated, if anything the opposite. But the DMA was written to purposely avoid European companies. You said it applied to all companies equally - I was just clarifying to note that’s only half true.

The European Parliament’s Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) report on the DMA, explicitly advocated for changing the DMA’s thresholds to keep U.S. firms within scope while exempting most EU competitors - which led to amendments to the DMA. The report's author, Andreas Schwab, a German MEP, suggested the DMA should "unquestionably" target only the five biggest U.S. firms.

Anyways - that’s off topic for this thread and I don’t want to get pulled into another DMA debate so I will leave it at that.
You contradict yourself. You agreed that the EU does not have large tech companies. If they lowered the threshold to "catch" some EU companies, this threshold would be too low to make sense. There is not a single reference to USA/US/American in the report you referenced.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.