Have to say, from my UK perspectve, if I want to pay someone I can do that straight from my account to theirs. I can understand avoiding a processing fee. But for me, transfers are without charge.
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.
Survey: Only 6% of U.S. iPhone Users Who Set Up Apple Pay Actually Use It
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Then my work here is done.Thank you for the education. I didn't know that either!
Nowhere near as low as the pathetically small sample size. 3.5k respondents, no wonder it doesn‘t feel representative of the real world.
Checks are bank transfers. When I get one, I scan it directly to my account via my phone camera and bank app, and my account is credited immediately. Basically all anyone does with checks now, read the account info on it and the amount and do a direct transfer. I think the security of doing this sucks but nobody seems to care. I'm supposed to keep the deposited check for a while in case there are issues so I guess there are ways to fix problems.
So this has actually happened to me more than once, but I bring up my phone or watch, and they will say the same thing "we dont take Apple Pay". And I try to have the argument, "but it shows tap to pay". And they will say go ahead and try.....and then it fails. And they tell me "told you so" LOL. Someone else on this forum said that its more than likely a software bug on the particular terminal (which I guess makes sense). But I previously thought (and so did other people on other forums) that the particular terminal had Apple Pay blocked (or mobile payments for that matter).
Sure, that's what I'd normally do too. But when you don't have their bank info, and they are standing right there, handing them a check can be the easiest (assuming you have and can locate a checkbook). If I didn't have a checkbook, then it would be having my bank send a check to their address.
All that aside, the point really was that as bad as checks are, it took a long time for them to mostly fade away. The difference between a card and a phone is not nearly so great.
The US is just so far behind many other countries when it comes to payment systems.
So many places still don’t accept contactless payments like Apple Pay. Cheques/checks are still being used for payments. There is no standard, universal and free payment system for bank-to-bank transfers. The whole payments system needs a major overhaul to modernise.
So many places still don’t accept contactless payments like Apple Pay. Cheques/checks are still being used for payments. There is no standard, universal and free payment system for bank-to-bank transfers. The whole payments system needs a major overhaul to modernise.
I don't see any advantage in payments by phone. I don't save any time as it takes me the same time to take my credit card and hold it against the terminal than it would to take out my iPhone. But the card is easier to handle and doesn't break if falling. Dialing in my pin code is only necessary every 25 payments or so.
The problem of mobile payment is that there is no competition. I can get credit cards everywhere, but if Apple or Google kicks you out, you can't pay. So it is better not to support them.
It would be a different thing if Apple would open his nfc for banks so they can use their own apps. It's much better for the customers.
The problem of mobile payment is that there is no competition. I can get credit cards everywhere, but if Apple or Google kicks you out, you can't pay. So it is better not to support them.
It would be a different thing if Apple would open his nfc for banks so they can use their own apps. It's much better for the customers.
The ACH system is the standard, universal and free system for bank-to-bank transfers in the US. It works great, how most people get their pay, social security, tax refund, stimulus checks and other direct deposits to their account. Also general way to pay bills if the banks offer the service. It works so well that people don't generally even notice it. The problem is getting access to it requires working with a bank - accounts, credits cards, Apple Pay, and that is not consistent. The US is behind because of a general lack of central authority telling people how to do things, it is more based on persuasion and marketing than just saying do it. Why US still doesn't use SI units and still has small value bills instead of coins.
Last edited:
I’m with Chase. I would like to transfer $500 to someone. My options are Zelle (requires supporting bank on other side), Wire Transfer (fee payable) or Check (ridiculous). There is no free ACH option available. So you are wrong, ACH is not universal.
It is free with my bank and I can make payments to anyone I have account info for or get money from anyone I want to give my info to. The problem with ACH is you need to go through a bank to use it. How banks charge their customers for access is a bank's decision. ACH is universal from a bank to bank perspective. How banks treat their customers varies.
Unfortunately that’s still wrong. It is not universal because not all banks offer ACH transfers as a payment option. I’m not talking about whether a fee is required or not.. it is simply not available for use.
You are then only left with alternative systems which either requires a fee to use or limited because of lack of support by other banks.
Statistically, that's a pretty good sample size. A larger sample size would reduce the margin of error but that's about it. You would still get a result of around 6%.
They don't know your Credit Card Number when you use the phone to pay. Is that important to you?
For goodness sake. I read that whole article and then find only 3,671 Americans were surveyed? Ask the banks about the percentages.
I actually think the real problem was that America wasn't ready for it. Early users would have been knocked back at so many locations that many of them would have given up.
When the first major bank issued compatible cards in Australia you could instantly use ApplePay at every retailer. I reckon our usage percentage over here is probably pretty high.
I actually think the real problem was that America wasn't ready for it. Early users would have been knocked back at so many locations that many of them would have given up.
When the first major bank issued compatible cards in Australia you could instantly use ApplePay at every retailer. I reckon our usage percentage over here is probably pretty high.
Honestly, the US would likely have never gotten contactless payment at all had Apple not released Apple Pay when it did. After all, it already has significant baggage here from previous failed rollouts, so the banks were perfectly okay just focusing on EMV and never bothering with contactless cards before now (never mind the retailers who would likely have purchased US-specific terminals without NFC hardware in the first place). Hell, a fair number of smaller stores and restaurants already are using US specific hardware without built-in NFC such as this POS system; NFC requires a different receipt printer to be purchased.
So, I would agree that ACH certainly has advantages (especially for receiving pay and other income), but there are some drawbacks for bill paying with a bank account via ACH agreement. These arise not from the ACH system directly, but from the agreements with the merchant who is billing you: the legal agreements are lengthy and dense, but somewhere in there is often a stipulation that they can reach into your account to "correct" mistakes (their definition) or charge late payment or other fees (as defined by them), or collect disputed amounts (again, as defined by them). So whereas a traditional dispute might involve a merchant sending you a bill and trying to get you to pay, with ACH they will just take what they want and it's up to you to try and get it back (if they are wrong). This also become problematic when you cancel a service but they keep billing you. Again, they have your money and it is your problem to try and get it back. This is where old-fashioned bill payment (receive invoice, send check) has an advantage - more control by the consumer over the funds in their bank account. An ACH agreement puts the leverage in the hands of the merchant. It works great...until you have a problem.
Last edited:
I’m referring to population coverage, not geographical coverage. I live in York, where it’s fine. Out in the North Yorkshire countryside, it’s rubbish. But there aren’t many ice cream stands out there either.I can assure you that our 4G coverage is far from 100%! At least in some parts of the UK.
Where I live, an eyeball check on coverage suggests maybe 50% of land area. My home is good but not far down the road, it disappears. 3G, on the same basis, seems to be about 80/85%. That uncovered area includes a signficant number of dwellings, places of work, and main roads.
My phone quite often switches to BT Wifi because of lack of 3G/4G. But that is not often of much use - e.g. while driving the dwell time in the zone of a single BT Wifi point is very short.
5G? What is 5G?
Did you miss this bit:
That uncovered area includes a significant number of dwellings, places of work, and main roads.
It is difficult to get a population coverage figure, but there are busy places, including ice cream vendors, out of all coverage on all networks. And many more which are out of 4G coverage.
A 3500 member random sample is more than enough to get 99% accurate results with a ±3 margin of error across a population of a billion people.
Let’s no forget, the coverage also depends on the network you’re with. I’m with EE & I’ve had stellar 4G coverage across the country from Cornwall to John o groats over the years.