There's nothing extra to do at all. I use it at Panera and other places all the time. Now right from my watch. It is far more secure.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Retailers Cite 'Insufficient Customer Demand' as Biggest Reason for Not Supporting Apple Pay
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's nothing extra to do at all. I use it at Panera and other places all the time. Now right from my watch. It is far more secure.
I put the phone up to the terminal also just to check. Some stores are so far behind, I like to remind them. At Best Buy, terminal has symbol, hold up phone, clerk: "thats not working yet" insert chip card into slot, clerk "we haven't upgraded our software". Roll eyes make them swipe the card. A Big Box tech retailer so far behind.
Interviews with retailers suggest that the company has relied on aggressive marketing to recruit participants. "They have been pushing hard and it's been that way for months," said the representative of one large retailer that has no plans to accept Apple Pay. "They have called and tried to persuade us even after we communicated our decision to them."
That's fairly unseemly, Tim
That's fairly unseemly, Tim
Not to mention that Apple Stores themselves don't even suggest the customer when making a purchase if they want use Apple Pay. I went to buy a Macbook Pro a couple days ago and neither Apple employee suggested I use Apple Pay. There's almost no awareness out in the real world. It's almost all just online.
Yup that and thinking that other terrible system, Current C, is a substitute. My payment method should have nothing to do with merchants tracking me.
Anywhere that has the Contactless Payment logo on their POS or chip and pin machines. There is no such thing as being Apple Pay only, as long as it supports NFC contactless payment it will work.
That's not true for all retailers. You can't assume the general customer will know this either.
How is that a flaw? That isn't a flaw of the logic, it is the logic. If they get more, we should be better compensated. The issue is that instead of collecting the information about us, they could instead pay us for it. Pay, in most cases, could involve discounts. That is why I point out discount club cards as good way to collect the data.
It sounds like the difference between us is that I don't see a functional difference between someone selling my data and someone collecting it without my permission or compensating me.
You're right. I told my girlfriend about Apple Pay and she reacted with "Why would I want to use my phone to pay for things?" I said "You don't use a separate camera, Sat Nav or iPod. This is another thing your phone can replace." "I suppose..." Not convinced, I don't think.
The turning point will be digital driver's licenses. Delaware and Iowa are going to do this (google it). I think more states will catch on. When people can leave their wallets at home the general population will catch on. I agree using a credit card isn't much of a pain point but having to have your wallet with you at all times definitely can be...
No, I use credit cards there too actually.In the fast food drive out window?
I think it’s because they are not losing sales. I mean, if I showed up to a store – with only my phone to pay – and then decided to not make my purchase, they would notice. However most, if not all people with Apple pay also have a wallet with them, and they just take out their wallet and pay in that traditional method. To them, they still made their sale and didn’t have to get an upgrade to a costly machine. The only way they will notice is for people to not go through with the purchase – make them put everything back – and tell them I would prefer to pay with NFC/Apple Pay. Here in Canada terminals are everywhere and I use Tap (NFC) for the time being until Pay starts up here.
Attention Chicago Residents!
How much support do you see for Apple Pay/NFC in the city? What stores specifically support it? I'm moving to downtown Chicago in August from my hometown in Michigan. I'll be switching banks, and my number one reason is to use Apple Pay on my iPhone 6 and Apple Watch.
Please quote me and let me know, thanks!
Edit: I'll consider making a thread out of this question at some point too, in order to potentially receive more responses.
How much support do you see for Apple Pay/NFC in the city? What stores specifically support it? I'm moving to downtown Chicago in August from my hometown in Michigan. I'll be switching banks, and my number one reason is to use Apple Pay on my iPhone 6 and Apple Watch.
Please quote me and let me know, thanks!
Edit: I'll consider making a thread out of this question at some point too, in order to potentially receive more responses.
Last edited:
Again, it's a solution to something that's not a problem.
When you invent something new, which there is a need for, everyone embraces it, and loves it.
When you take something that's not really problem, and just make a slightly different version to it, the need is simply not there to push it forward.
A plastic card, that you can use instead of paying cash, and you can instead pay at the end of the month, and then select to spread the payments, IS a big thing, and was adopted with glee. It was a BIG thing.
A slightly different way to use a card, which may of may not save a few seconds, just is not that important.
Something that I've been wondering is how much of a pain chip will actually be. The majority of cards are going to be chip and signature, which is still going to operate much like swiping does now (no signature unless you're spending more than $50). Chip and PIN cards are always going to require the PIN. I would imagine that the former isn't going to be painful enough to switch to using a phone to pay, right?
Ok. Next time I'll crawl through the drive thru window and grab the NFC terminal.
Exactly. I think it could be a money earner for apple but I don't think it's that much easier for customers than the current method.
What would have seemed more apple like would be a disruption that makes things much easier and benefits the businesses and customers.
Like not having a cashier at all, just pick up the items you need and walk out, everything automatically charged to your account. That would seem more Apple like. But at least this isn't putting people out of jobs.
It wouldn't be easy, but that's what apple does or did?
I agree that the group that feels the pain point for the cost of fraud is the group that will push the hardest for change.
Currently most consumers don't feel that pressure point. Sure they may have had the inconvenience of getting a new card issued. But the percentage that have had their identity stolen, lives significantly inconvenienced, etc - is very small.
If the banks switch that pressure point to retailers...they will have an incentive to change.
The optimal solution would be a contactless payment system that lets consumers opt in for loyalty groups/retail programs....rather than having it done passively. But not sure if there is enough cooperation in the market for that to happen. Retailers will be very reluctant for an 'opt in' type system.
Last edited:
Either your location does things differently from where I am or you just don't know what to look for. Although I rarely see an ApplePay logo, I frequently see the contactless-card logo in stores:
Most places that display this logo work just fine with ApplePay. The only exceptions I've found are places (mostly MCX/CuttentC partners like CVS and Rite Aid) that have taken steps to deliberately disable ApplePay.
Bingo! Absolutely correct. Their goal is to hurt the credit card business, not improve the customer experience. See this article from Business Insider, where (at the end of the article) former Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott, when asked if he thinks CurrentC will work, is quoted as saying "I don’t know that it will, and I don’t care. As long as Visa suffers."
When you've got this kind of arrogance in charge of critical business decisions, you aren't going to get a decision that makes any sense.
WRT chip-and-pin, yes. WRT contactless cards or chip-and-signature, no. If a contactless card is lost or stolen, it can be used fraudulently just like a swipe-based card.
ApplePay card numbers don't work apart from the phone/watch that they are assigned to, and if your phone is stolen, it requires fingerprint or PIN authorization in order to be used. This is much more secure than a contactless card (but is equivalent to chip-and-pin).
The benefit is the security. If you pay with ApplePay, and the merchant gets hacked, the hackers get a device-account-number that is useless when separated from your phone/watch. If you use a physical card, they get enough information to make fraudulent purchases and you have to deal with getting a replacement card.
Yes, it's the same excuse, but there's less justification.
A contactless card only adds a little security. Yes, there is (or should be) encryption going on so a system-hack won't let thieves produce a cloned card, but a stolen card can still be used until canceled. Ditto for any other kind of card, including chip-and-pin (although chip-and-pin cards will be much less usable after October, when merchants will end up liable for the fraud if the card is swiped.)
Apple Pay avoids all of this by using a device-specific account number that has no use whatsoever when separated from the phone/watch. And if your device is stolen, it will need to be authenticate by fingerprint or PIN, and can be remotely deactivated via the icloud.com web site.
In other words, there are clear security benefits to Apple Pay that are not really present with a contactless card. So I wouldn't expect customer demand for the two tow be identical.
Coming soon.
In October 2015 (for all but gas pumps, which will be affected in October 2017), all four major card issuers (MasterCard, Visa, American Express and Discover) are going to have new rules. See this article describing the new rules.
Under the new rules, if your card has a chip, and the merchant doesn't process the card via that chip (that is, types in the number or lets you swipe it), then the merchant, not the bank, will be held liable if the charge turns out to be fraudulent. We should expect everybody's card to be replaced with chip-based cards, starting around when the new rules take effect in October, since the banks will want to shift the liability for fraud as soon as they can.
Once this happens, merchants are going to install and start using chip readers and NFC readers really fast, because they aren't going to want to be on the hook for fraudulent purchases made on their terminals.
I think that's a matter of local store policy/setup. Where I am, it always worked at Home Depot.
HD is officially "coming soon" for Apple Pay, but as I understand it, individual store managers have been supporting it (via generic contactless payment card support) for over a year already.
That's not true. They do get your name - I see it on the receipts from Apple Pay all the time. And while they don't get your card number, they get a device-account-number that acts as a stand-in for your card number. The DAN is specific to your phone, but it only changes if you remove and re-enroll your card.
WRT purchase tracking, using the DAN is a little less useful than a CC number, because multiple devices registered to the same card (your phone, your spouse's phone, your watches, etc.) will have different DANs, but they can still be used to track you.
Yes, and that's due to an explicit and deliberate decision to refuse to accept Apple Pay. That's not really the same thing as stores that just don't want to make the investment in NFC terminals.
You may feel differently if the merchant gets hacked and the hacker gets your AmEx card information, including all the security codes on the mag stripe. When this happens, they can make a new card with your info and place faudulent card-present transactions (which are often subject less scrutiny than card-not-present transactions, where only the card number is used.)
ApplePay (and chip-based transactions) are not nearly as easy to compromise via a vendor-hack, because there isn't a fixed set of security codes, but a dynamically-generated set produced via strong encryption.
With all of these "Pay" initiatives (Apple, Google, Samsung, ad nauseum), I did wonder why this is such a big deal. No one I know of has ever really complained about swiping a credit card. Unlike say - their cell phones or MP3 players, which everyone hated before the iPhone or iPod. Not sure the average consumer really cares outside of us gadget/tech lovers. I couldn't get my wife to use it - especially since its not universal. If people like my wife encounter a single pain point in ever using it (oh, you don't take it?) they will put it away and go back to the tried and true way of doing things. I don't blame them - if I were less enamored with gadgets I'd do the same thing.
I meet people almost daily that have an iPhone 6 or 6 Plus and they have no idea what Apple Pay is. I'll use Apple Pay in a grocery store or fast food restaurant and someone will invariably say something like, "Can I do that with my iPhone?" I ask them what iPhone they have and when they say 6 or 6 Plus I tell them yes. They have zero clue that the feature is actually available.
Part of that is Apple's fault. The other part is there are a lot of people walking around that couldn't care less for such features. And then there is just general stupidity.
Mark
Part of that is Apple's fault. The other part is there are a lot of people walking around that couldn't care less for such features. And then there is just general stupidity.
Mark