I rarely use NFC payments for any purchases. If Apple gets into the payment space, I probably will.
The reason they get credit is that people actually use the solutions they provide.
The reason they get credit is that people actually use the solutions they provide.
The entire payment industry is moving to chip / NFC, and the parent offers up that maybe Whole Foods is prepping for Apple.
No, they aren't. They're prepping for, again, the entire payment industry. Hundreds of products across all major payment vendors. You haven't used it because the US payment space in particular is very slow, but soon enough every card you carry will feature it, and the technology will be ubiquitous, with or without Apple getting involved.
This happens repeatedly: Apple is very good at choosing the right time to enter a market -- hitting it when it hits primetime -- and then they get credit for creating the market. Incidental, but I saw an incredible conversation the other day where multiple participants were vilifying Apple's competitors for copying Apple on wearables.
Apple will be the first company to convince the rest of my technophobic family to actually use the technology. You're not wrong, in payments they will certainly take more credit than they are due. But, they will increase the uptake more than anyone through their implementation and you have to give them credit for that.
The interesting thing about that insight is that it does seem as though people are trying to copy Apple before they have even entered the arena. They will probably, fairly or unfairly, also get credit for creating the wearables market. My best guess is that Apple will freeze the market on Sept 9th with a product that is far superior. If they do, that conversation may ring true in the next few months.
I probably give them too much credit and you give them too little - seems like a reasonable balance.
Also, completely agree that Wholefoods are not entering because of Apple. Seems a poor assumption to be making
You seem pretty certain of that. Apple has a long list of initiative failures.
Are you overloading the technology side of this? I'm not saying "Apple versus Google Wallet", for instance -- pretty much every Canadian Mastercard, and now many debit card, has NFC on it. I pay at the gas station and the grocery store by moving my card in proximity to a reader. This is ubiquitous. Putting an Apple middleman in the solution seems unnecessary and backwards.
The interesting thing about that insight is that it does seem as though people are trying to copy Apple before they have even entered the arena.
I find this line of thought simply incredible. Wearables have been around for years, and are a simple manifestation of technological refinement in processors, displays, batteries, and wireless technology. It is happening because the technology is there and making it both possible and compelling. Yes, Apple will eventually get in the market, but the notion that everyone else is copying Apple in advance is simply incredible.
I probably give them too much credit and you give them too little - seems like a reasonable balance.
Again, the entire payment industry is moving to NFC. Wearables are becoming technologically possible and powerful. In neither case does Apple deserve any credit at all -- this isn't a case where the middle ground must be right -- and it is rather incredible when they are given any.
I should be clearer on the payments issue - this isn't a technology problem. All the technology is already there. But, I don't think Apple will serve as a what you would call a middleman They will create an experience that people can actually use. The component parts add up to nothing if no one will use them. Living in a market where NFC is fairly ubiquitous, I watch most people simply ignore it's there at all.
>Wearables have been around for years There is nothing truly compelling about any of the wearables I have seen or used over the last two years. I never said 'everyone' in the market was copying Apple. I think products like Pebble have done a great job. I was referring to the huge number of products thrown out by Samsung, Sony, LG in the last few months that give off a certain ring of desperation.
>it is rather incredible when they are given any. My guess is that the first company to move, let's say 50 million wearables, will be Apple. Pick any smart watch and try and sell it to a non-techie. Most people will not buy it. If those products were developed in a vacuum, away from Apple's influence, over the next few years I think people still wouldn't buy them. People value design, user experience mixed in with those new technologies. I don't understand how you cannot credit them at all. Microsoft had commercially available tablets long before Apple did. No one bought them. And most people aren't buying wearables and will not until Apple enters the market. You may call that timing but I don't - it's much more than that.
I acknowledge that payments are more ubiquitous than smartphones, tablets and wearables were when Apple entered the market. That does dilute my payments argument a bit. Maybe a middle ground can't be found here but to give them no credit at all seems rather ludicrous.
In half a year we're likely to see discussions about how whatever Apple is launching in 9 days was "obvious" and how they once again just happened to catch the wave at the right time. And for some reason other companies suddenly find it technologically feasible to fit NFC into their wearables, something that was apparently impossible before 9.9. 2014.
Fingerprint authenticated NFC? That would be solving a complete non-problem, misunderstanding the whole role of NFC.
You can get business cards with NFC. Every Skylander action figure has NFC in it. Credit and payment cards have NFC. But here you're comically holding that putting it in a wearable will be a grand innovation.
This sort of bubble and ignorance is extraordinary. But yes, I fully expect that after Apple releases something, years after so many others embraced NFC, you'll go forth telling all how innovative they were.
In any case, let's come back in half a year or a year and see how other companies have responded to what, if anything Apple releases next week.
I know. Remember when Microsoft started the tablet market in 2003 and then Apple comes along 7 years later and steals credit for tablets! Psh!
And remember when Apple got credit for smartphones when all they did was enter the market that BlackBerry had created and turn it on it's fricken head with a device so much of a leap-frog that blackberry management thought would never ship? [http://mathiasmikkelsen.com/2011/05/blackberry-makers-though...]
And remember when they strolled into the MP3 player market after the Rio players were crushing it with literally thousands of units sold every year? They step into that market right when it's about to blow up and next thing you know, everybody acts like Apple was the company that put the white buds in everybody's ears!
In all seriousness, yes, Apple does of course time their entry into a market. And when they do, they unleash a torrent of innovation, marketing, and brand goodwill. I bet name recognition for fitbit is under 50% on the street. What do you think that would/will be if Apple released a similar wearable? Like them or not, Apple products are iconic. My dad knows iPod and iPhone. Do you think he knows HTC One? Or even Galaxy S?
So they get credit because of a perception bubble. I've been using Google Wallet for a while now, it works fine. Before that I had a PayPass credit card, which also worked just fine.