Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Must be a European thing. Who uses PayPal to pay daily purchases.
i live in the UK and use a Android phone and just to be nosey, I looked to see if I could use Paypal as default payments using the NFC on my phone, I can't, or I can't find how to.
Not that i would want to, the few times i use my phone to pay, I prefer to use Android pay or what ever it is called.
 
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.
Again, I don’t want to get pulled into a debate on this. So this will be my last response on the subject.

If the US passed a law giving a tax break to any car company whose CEO headed DOGE, it technically applies to all car companies equally, but it obviously is targeted. Same thing here.

You don’t have to say “US/American” if you write the legislation in such a way to ensure Spotify isn’t included, for example. It’s not rocket science. And it’s not just me saying it either. See this article, key quote here (emphasis mine)
Finally, although the EU has publicly committed to boosting innovation and reducing regulatory red tape, the DMA is consistently treated as an exception. For example, former Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi’s landmark report emphasized the need to reduce bureaucracy to strengthen European competitiveness, but nonetheless praised the DMA. Likewise, in its Competitiveness Compass strategy, the Commission prioritizes cutting excessive regulations to foster innovation. But while the Commission has already announced its intention to withdraw certain digital regulations, such as the AI Liability Act, the DMA remains untouched. As such, if the EU is genuinely committed to reducing regulatory burdens, why is it doubling down on the DMA while relaxing other rules? The answer seems clear: Other regulations would place burdens on many European companies, but the DMA primarily targets American firms.

To be absolutely clear, the EU has every right to do this, and Apple should 100% follow the laws of the jurisdictions in which it operates. But we don’t have to pretend that the DMA applies to everyone equally when the “spirit of the law” clearly is to make sure American companies get stuck with more onerous regulations than European ones.
 
Again, I don’t want to get pulled into a debate on this. So this will be my last response on the subject.

If the US passed a law giving a tax break to any car company whose CEO headed DOGE, it technically applies to all car companies equally, but it obviously is targeted. Same thing here.

You don’t have to say “US/American” if you write the legislation in such a way to ensure Spotify isn’t included, for example. It’s not rocket science. And it’s not just me saying it either. See this article, key quote here (emphasis mine)


To be absolutely clear, the EU has every right to do this, and Apple should 100% follow the laws of the jurisdictions in which it operates. But we don’t have to pretend that the DMA applies to everyone equally when the “spirit of the law” clearly is to make sure American companies get stuck with more onerous regulations than European ones.
Whether this was intended or purely a side-effect based on the priorities, I think in practice the American companies are more closely scrutinized. Agree that if you're operating in a country you've got to abide by their laws full stop or walk away. It is what it is. Apple did some shenanigans in Ireland a ways back and had to pay some taxes. The flip side of the coin is that a rich entity may take the approach of it being cheaper to pay a fine than abide by the law (for a variety of reasons). Very complicated. I will say it makes for interesting times
 
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.
Or with Apple they maybe won't because they aren't seen as abusive. Google is not likely to still meet the definition of "better" as defined by MR postters - even after all is said and done.
 
I'm all for open and competition but what do I get from this?
Apple's reputedly getting 0.15% from each transaction from Visa or Mastercard.
What are the fees involved with PayPal? What do they get?

I use PayPal and have both person and business accounts and they are pretty awful.
Really poor software and high fees for not a lot in return.
Why would I use PayPal over Apple pay's system with most bank cards (Visa/Mastercard etc)?
One benefit is that the PayPal solution gives you a free debit Mastercard that also doesn't add fees for international transactions. If you have use cases for that, it's pretty attractive compared to many bank card offers.
 
One benefit is that the PayPal solution gives you a free debit Mastercard that also doesn't add fees for international transactions. If you have use cases for that, it's pretty attractive compared to many bank card offers.
I would highly recommend using wise.com if you want to travel and avoid international transaction fees as well as benefitting from market exchange rates. You don't even need to get their card, which is free, if you install their app it loads the debit card into Apple Pay for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppliedMicro
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.
None of the available options even remotely give the wanted functionality in all of the myriad of aspects a smartphone has. Many iPhone users who want more choice here are using an iPhone because it's still the lesser evil, but that doesn’t mean it's fine, far from it. And saying that it isn't fine doesn’t imply that there is an alternative available that is strictly "finer". It may be better in the specific aspect, but worse in two other ones. So there is no good solution. But we want better solutions, so we advocate for them.
 
I would highly recommend using wise.com if you want to travel and avoid international transaction fees as well as benefitting from market exchange rates. You don't even need to get their card, which is free, if you install their app it loads the debit card into Apple Pay for you.
Wise has currency conversion fees, which the PayPal card doesn't. My use case isn't travel, but online payments. Also, if you already have a PayPal account anyway, this avoids an additional account. I think PayPal also does not require a balance for those card payments, which Wise seems to require.
 
Wise has currency conversion fees, which the PayPal card doesn't. My use case isn't travel, but online payments. Also, if you already have a PayPal account anyway, this avoids an additional account. I think PayPal also does not require a balance for those card payments, which Wise seems to require.
Yeah but compare PayPal's sh***y exchange rate to Wise market based exchange rate and you'll see "fees" of a much higher order. Wise charges you a small fixed amount for moving money between currencies.

Let me give you a recent example of PayPal "fees".
I recent moved money on PayPal from US $ to NZ $.
This is a direct cut and paste of their record on it.
$369.06 USD$600.45 NZD1.626980515097

Now with wise.com they offer
$369.06 USD$616 NZD1.66910529
Wise charges USD$2.94 for this or NZD$4.9

So I'm better off with wise.com by USD$6 / NZD$10
 
I'm all for open and competition but what do I get from this?
Apple's reputedly getting 0.15% from each transaction from Visa or Mastercard.
What are the fees involved with PayPal? What do they get?

I use PayPal and have both person and business accounts and they are pretty awful.
Really poor software and high fees for not a lot in return.
Why would I use PayPal over Apple pay's system with most bank cards (Visa/Mastercard etc)?
You gain the freedom to choose.
 
Yeah but compare PayPal's sh***y exchange rate to Wise market based exchange rate and you'll see "fees" of a much higher order.
PayPal has ****** exchange rates normally, I agree (and always choose the card's exchange rate instead for that reason — at least PayPal gives you the choice), but for their new Mastercard they now have documented that the Mastercard exchange rate will be applied, without any conversion fees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
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.
Not even remotely comparable.
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.
So Apple should just give away the farm then? Nothing should be proprietary on the iPhone so everyone can use it how they see fit?
 
So Apple should just give away the farm then? Nothing should be proprietary on the iPhone so everyone can use it how they see fit?
Apple‘s iOS operating system may and does remain proprietary and a differentiating factor.

iOS is not Android. And fair access to third-party providers does not make it the same.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sophisticatednut
... thereby allowing Apple to get a 0.15% cut of every Apple Pay transaction


PayPal gets a 4% cut...


and will eventually add a pay over time feature with options for six, 12, and 24 monthly installments for purchases.
Reason number one to never to use PayPal. Because more "debt" is the last thing we'll need now.
 
*News contains the word "EU"*

*90% of the posts are about politics*

So I’m in a EU country and I’m not seeing or getting anything from the PayPal app about activating NFC payment. And the Contactless App is still only Wallet.

Any other requirements?
 
The only drawback I can think of is getting forced to download and use multiple apps to pay if a merchant decides certain methods aren't allowed.
If a merchant doesn't allow certain methods be happy you can download multiple apps, else you should use cash.
 
The only drawback I can think of is getting forced to download and use multiple apps to pay if a merchant decides certain methods aren't allowed.
There's no drawback. It practically creates a virtual Mastercard. It was enabled for Gpay/Android like 5 years ago and with an NFC reader you could just read the Mastercard and kind of guess the CCV, which was just the last 3 numbers of the card number. That's how im (unofficially) using Paypal to pay at Amazon.
 
PayPal has ****** exchange rates normally, I agree (and always choose the card's exchange rate instead for that reason — at least PayPal gives you the choice), but for their new Mastercard they now have documented that the Mastercard exchange rate will be applied, without any conversion fees.

Are you referring to this one?

Because I couldn't find reference to any other card and this one absolutely charges forex fees, it's 4%:
 
So again how is Paypal’s solution benefiting an end user in this case? I am having a hard time understanding this?
 
If a countries/regions legislation don't work for you, go where it does. What's this typical US protectionism towards big companies? No wonder you get scammed in almost every aspect in the US and yet say "Thank you".
As the EU in a guise for the consumer in reality is anti-American tech. Yet you (the royal you) happily use the iPhone. Go figure..
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.