I'm assuming, for instance, we won't see Android Pay integration in to Bitcoin apps any time soon.
See here: http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/05/android-pay-will-emb...
Issuer-side tokenization wasn't even launched until 2014-09 by both Mastercard and Visa ("coinciding" with the launch of Apple Pay), so they couldn't have used it for the first version of Google Wallet.
When it comes down to it, tokens are just credit cards that have a mapping back to an account. The network-side tokenization spec includes additional measures for provisioning and security, but they're still just credit cards. (If that weren't true, then all of the merchants would require terminal upgrades to work with them).
In issuer-side tokenization, it's the issuer (the user's bank/cc company) that creates the token, and they map it to accounts internally. In network-side tokenization, it's the network (MC, Visa, etc.) that handles the token creation, and they map it back to the previously issued credit card before the charge goes back to the issuer.
http://www.nfcworld.com/2014/03/11/328236/emvco-publishes-to...
Google Wallet initially capitalized on Mastercard PayWave (or was that Visa's?) and when the other cards wouldn't play ball they made a virtual Mastercard for use.
Now that the card companies started playing ball, maybe b/c of Apple's push, Google can work with the new standards.
USB type C would not exist without lightning. Why? Because the customers for the USB-IF aren't end-users... they're bottom-feeding OEMs who want to shave $0.001 off the cost of each port and don't give a shit. Apple doesn't have to care about that and can forge ahead with their own standard. That creates demand in the market (specifically the actual customers of the USB-IF like Samsung who immediately want to copy anything and everything Apple does.)
Android Pay would be the same mostly-dead-end that Google Wallet was without Apple Pay. Why? Because Google has no power to get banks, card networks, or merchants on board. Because even if they release it that doesn't mean any of the OEMs will necessarily adopt it. Because a huge number of Android devices are cheap junk only purchased because it's almost impossible to buy plain feature phones anymore, not because the buyer actually gives a shit. Apple doesn't have any of those problems. If Apple offers Apple Pay they know higher-end merchants will adopt it. Apple customers are more likely to use it. The whole brand/cachè thing creates pressure to get on board the train.
Go ahead and ask Verizon and Sprint how holding out against the iPhone worked for them.
Many barriers to adoption of technology are social, cultural, or just plain old inertia. Apple is in a unique position to force change, yet there appears to be a pathological desire to lie and claim Apple isn't relevant.
It was one of Apple's selling points that they do not see what you buy. They only handle the monetary transaction. Only the merchant and you know what was purchased etc.
It is funny to imagine google knowing this valuable information is running right through their service/device and they do not or cannot take a look. As a data miner that would be more than frustrating.
This payment solution relies on tokenization. Tokens are mapped to physical payment cards (Google will probably act as a Token Service Provider). Tokens once provisioned on the mobile hold among other things a Digitized Personal Account Number + a set of single use payment keys (or limited use keys) for payment.