No, because a normal wallet can hold both.. In this case, Apple is the wallet and they choose what you can hold.
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.
PayPal Played Role in EU Antitrust Complaint About Apple Wallet
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This might be a bit much but ...
NFC basics | Connectivity | Android Developers
developer.android.com
It's within every company's right to complain to regulators about anticompetitive or monopolistic behavior. Apple complained to the FTC about Qualcomm's cellular patent fees and that triggered official regulatory action as well.
So do I. Note, however, that Apple isn’t blocking access to the hardware, but rather just a specific use for it. They do allow 3rd party access for other uses of the NFC hardware, just not for payments. It still isn’t right.
Apple didn’t develop any hardware, NFC has existed for over a decade it’s not proprietary of Apple. They just added it to their devices so they could be used for payments and many other things nfc can be used for.
Correct, but NFC isn’t Apple’s proprietary technology. It’s an international standard that has been in use for over a decade. And it’s used for multiple purposes, not just for payments.
Users don’t care in any of this (or, I should say a huge number of users don’t care because Apple has a minority -20% or less- marketshare in all these countries, and it’s a minority of that minority that care).
On Android, people can use 3rd party apps, such as their bank’s own app, to make payments using their phones. With Apple it’s their way (Apple Pay) or the Long Island expressway.
How would that be a Problem? They made the camera and the apps store. It seems like the mistake was allowing any access to anything. They should delete the App Store and only offer APIs for 1st party apps. Everyone else can use web apps like the Original I phone just 15 years ago.
At some point why can’t i put a ford software on a GM. Why can’t I put other self driving software on my Tesla.
That sounds like a marvellous idea and would definitely not destroy the iPhone. Are you a Samsung shareholder by any chance?
Great then there is a choice. Users can choose android in that case.
hopefully the EU will bring down the hammer on Apple.
All the griping about Apple's 30/15% for App store and trying to break open iOS, enforce side loading and bring in alternative payment methods. What about PayPal's 6% commission for all payments?
As a developer who uses PayPal and Apple App Store with Apple in-app payments the PayPal 6% bugs me the most because I get the least for the money I lose.
With the App store I get all the local tax taken care of, I get refunds taken care of and I get credit card fees covered as well as being provided with software to create my apps (Xcode).
With PayPal I get SFA other than losing 6% on a system that looks, works and feels like it is engineered and maintained by Dilbert's Pointy hair boss.
The end user isn't going to get a better deal.
This is nothing other than a cash grab by corporates using legislation as muscle.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly but PayPal effectively does.
EU - legislation for hire at the right price or out of envy/spite.
As a developer who uses PayPal and Apple App Store with Apple in-app payments the PayPal 6% bugs me the most because I get the least for the money I lose.
With the App store I get all the local tax taken care of, I get refunds taken care of and I get credit card fees covered as well as being provided with software to create my apps (Xcode).
With PayPal I get SFA other than losing 6% on a system that looks, works and feels like it is engineered and maintained by Dilbert's Pointy hair boss.
The end user isn't going to get a better deal.
This is nothing other than a cash grab by corporates using legislation as muscle.
Apple doesn't have a monopoly but PayPal effectively does.
EU - legislation for hire at the right price or out of envy/spite.
No it’s not, and it’s a ridiculously bad-faith argument to even suggest the two scenarios are comparable; it’s ludicrous to have to decide what phone you want to buy based on if it is compatible with your bank card or payment service of choice. The metaphor is laughably flawed. There is no reason for Apple to limit NFC to Apple apps beyond giving Apple a competitive edge, one they aren’t not entitled to as the device manufacturer rather than end user.
What’s next, GM buys Coca-cola and designs the cup holders to eject Pepsi products? Hyundai buys Spotify and only lets the aux and usb inputs work with the Spotify app? Remember that every argument Apple makes can than be used by other companies to limit consumer choice; Apple policy does not exist in a vacuum or above the fray of competition like on some Mount Olympus. They are a company, a public one with fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders; there primary goal, as required by law, must always be to maximize profit and provide the best value to those shareholders. The foundation of every decision is profit, and they, like any company, will never favor the user experience— or any other product attribute— over profit.
Last edited:
By existing in their jurisdiction. Apple can leave if they don't like the laws and regulations they're subject to. What kind of question is "what right do they have?" Are you under the impression that its a new phenomenon for a company to be subject to the laws and regulations of the places they operate in?
Of all the companies I don't particularly want this to benefit, PayPal is up there.
They invented the mechanism that has allowed 1000s of banks around the world to allow their card to be linked to apples system. They also allow for FaceID that is the only one of its kind that is certified to be used for payments.
Allowing one wallet means allowing any wallet. Because of the trust Apple has generated people can use that trust against customers.
The problem is that there are anti-trust and anti-competition regulations around the world, including EU and U.S.
Ironically, no one in the US was interested in NFC payment when Apple introduced Apple Pay. It took years of work going bank by bank to build a secure functionality into the OS and hardware of the iPhone. The 3rd parties are garbage. It’s Apple’s built in security that makes people want to use it.
It’s not for free since iPhone owners buy hardware. Your way of thinking is exactly like any car manufacturer would demand their cars owner to pay fee for giving a lift/ride to someone else than the driver self. It sounds stupid
Why would I have any less faith in Chase than I do Apple in making sure my payments are secure, seeing as how fraud results in significant losses for the issuer. It’s in the bank’s own interest to keep things secure.
So, it's for the interest of competitors and banks instead of actual customers. How quaint. Good job EU, working for your real bosses. 