I can't even be bothered with Apply Pay anymore. Not Apple's fault or anything, but I just do not have the time in my life trying to wave my watch around like a moron just so it won't work anyway. And I am tried of asking the cashiers about it and getting the "What's Apply Pay?" response. It's easier and quicker to whip out the actual card and be done with it. Ultimately after wasting my time and looking like an ass I have to do that anyway.
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.
Target Working on QR Code Mobile Wallet as Apple Pay Holdout Continues
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I only try it if:
- The place is listed on MasterCard's site.
- The terminal is somewhere that's accessible to customers.
Everyone in my house uses Amazon Prime, so I get the convenience aspect.
Still feels a little irresponsible to me to have basic things like toothpaste, shampoo, toilet paper, etc shipped to my house, so I buy those at a place like Target (because they're a lot less expensive there than the grocery stores in my area).
Do you live in a state that truly doesn't tax online purchases, or do you inaccurately report your online purchases in order to not have to pay the sales tax that you owe for them?
With Amazon Prime Same Day/Now, and Safeway home delivery, I go to stores less & less. Plus I don't like people anyway, and there's always a bunch in stores.
In terms of securing all of their customers' card data, they implemented end-to-end encryption, which prevents any card data from being stolen by a malware hack in their stores. Much much much better protection than Apple Pay.
I have to admit that you're right. It still amazes me the number of times that I use ApplePay and the cashier responds like I just did the greatest magic trick of all time and screams out and calls over the other cashiers. More than a year after ApplePay I shouldn't be the first person they've ever seen use it! I don't really get why it's not catching on better (other than store acceptance isn't high enough to reach critical mass so that people can make it their "default" method). But one thing I can say is that if ApplePay isn't taking off, these crappy QR solutions don't have a chance!
P.S. Cool user name! ;-)
Last edited:
It would be nice if you educated yourself on this topic.
Fact: The merchant does not pay any additional fee to take Apple Pay beyond the normal transactions fees assessed for taking the credit or debit card it is linked to. Apple pay is actually cheaper than some competing alternatives as it counts as "card present" and thus allowing the merchant to pay the lowest fee to the issuer for being able to accept the card.
Fact: Apple takes a minuscule cut from the banks end. Last I checked something like 800 banks are on board in the USA alone. The banks, the ones that are actually paying the fee, seem to think it is well worth the cost for the added security.
Fact: The merchant's only fee is purchasing and setting up new terminals that have NFC capability.
Fact: All Merchants, with some limited time expiring exceptions, who do no offer chip and sign are now directly liable for any fraud that occurs on their terminals (previously in was the card issuer). This requires any merchant seeking to avoid this fraud liability to upgrade or replace their existing terminals to accept chip and sign, the vast majority of these chip and sign compatible terminals also have NFC capability build in.
This is not about extra caution, this is about this company wanting to collect and sell your information.
But enabling ApplePay would also enable AndroidPay and SamsungPay.....they are ALL just NFC! There is no favoritism involved in accepting ApplePay.
I can imagine some piss poor merchant acquirers charging extra for NFC transactions, but that would apply for any form of NFC payment and not just Apple Pay. It's also unlikely Target and the like would let themselves be subject to such fees.
Something to keep in mind though is that NFC acceptance requires a separate certification; it can't be rolled into the EMV one that they've had to do anyway. This requires time, effort and money. If barely anyone's using NFC now, why would someone like Target implement it? It's much easier to keep it disabled until some future point in time when it becomes worthwhile (or when checkouts mostly disappear altogether, whenever that happens).
Target (and Home Depot, etc) were hacked because when a card is normally swiped on/inserted in a PIN pad, the PIN pad sends the card number over to the cash register in clear text (not encrypted). Malware on their cash registers was able to scrape the unencrypted card numbers out of the cash registers memory, save them, and ship them off to the hackers.
With point-to-point encryption (which is a not-trivial extra expense retailers have to pay to implement), when you swipe your card (or insert a chip card), the PIN pad itself encrypts the card data (in a tamper resistant part of the PIN pad) with an encryption key that is unique for that specific PIN pad. The encrypted card data is sent to the register. If there were malware on the register, it wouldn't see your actual card data, because it's encrypted. And since each PIN pad uses a different encryption key, even if hackers stole a crap-ton of encrypted transactions, they're going to have to crack each key individually. That's the one end. The cash register sends the encrypted transaction out of the store for authorization, and at some point (usually at the retailer's payment processor, or some other place outside of the retailers network), the transaction gets decrypted there, and then sent off to the issuer for authorization. That's the other end.
Any card used at Target or Home Depot is protected in that manner.
Last edited:
Yes, that's what CurrentC was supposed to be about. But now both WalMart and Target have seemed to confirm that they will now allow credit cards to be enrolled in their Payment apps. And I'd sure give my consumer protected credit card number to them long before I'd give them my checking account number. If they take credit cards this way, the card companies should be charging them "Card Not Present" fees since they don't actually use your card. That is something like 1% higher than "Card Present". Apple Pay counts as "Card Present." So they are actually going to pay more to not take ApplePay?
So how is that more secure than Apple Pay which is end to end encrypted and masked...
It seems they can already do it based on the credit card you are using - http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmir...teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/
This is frustrating. How ****ing hard is it to support NFC? I'm surprised by how many stores are purposely trying to avoid Apple Pay. What is it about Apple Pay that's so terrible?
This is just holding back advancement. The wallet could easily become obsolete in 5-10 years if more and more places begin supporting Apple Pay now.
This is just holding back advancement. The wallet could easily become obsolete in 5-10 years if more and more places begin supporting Apple Pay now.
This probably is out of context from the original post you were responding to, but yes, regardless of the Android Pay status, Target and Wal-Mart are Pay holdouts because Apple allows them to sell the Watch well after they introduced Pay.
I get that Apple has existing contracts in place for iPhones, and iPads, etc., which pre-dated Pay. But if a major retail partner of mine refused to accept a payment method of mine, when there is no physical reason they can't, which improves my customer's shopping experience while making the payment infinitely safer, I would not have granted them a contract to sell my latest, greatest, and "most personal product" to date.
If they don't play ball, they don't get the goods. Unless of course Apple needs Wal-Mart & Target to sell the Watch far more than they need the Watch. Apple has basically just given away all of their negotiating power here ...
Business and greed are really one in the same. You tell me which business wouldn't want to be a monopoly and I'll sell you a bridge for cheap. Some corporations handle that much better than others. Some industries handle it much better than others. It's no secret the bottom line is the bottom line. Growth is the key. Growth + customer happiness is just gravy.
QR Codes? Oh how quaint. I thought that they went out of use about the same time as the i386 Processor.
Seriously, what are these CEO's smoking? Why do they sign up for something that makes it harder for the customer to shop?
It's more secure because it protects every card used to pay in their stores, whether the card is swiped, inserted, or shot over via NFC (one day).
Apple Pay only protects cards enrolled in Apple Pay. So assuming that every one of their customers has a smartphone (which they don't), and Apple only has 50% of that market, and it's the only the latest iPhones that support Apple Pay, ... Apple Pay only covers a small percentage of their customers that pay with cards.
So IMO a solution that covers 100% of their customers that pay with cards > a solution that only covers a small percentage of their customers that pay with cards.
Last edited:
I wouldn't even say 100%, since you still have those idiots that use checks.
Meanwhile in the rest of the world, Chip/PIN has been in use for years.
I won't have any NFC cards though. IMHO, they are an open door to thieves in crowded places. Pocket held scanners can read all your details.
So I put the card into the device, enter my pin and I'm done. Mind you I mostly use cash for anything under £20/$30.
I've used Apple Pay a few times. Simple and quick.
There is no way on this earth that I will use QR codes for anything.
AFAIK, the mag stripe is a backup for the occassions when the NFC/etc reader goes wrong.
And why can't they do both? Target may lose customers over it if they don't. They lost me until they do