No Contactless Payment System In Next iPhone 239
RedEaredSlider writes "Citing fears over a lack of an industry standard, Apple has ditched plans to include near field communication technology in its next iPhone, The Independent reports. The technology, which allows users to make payments simply by waving their devices over special readers, is widely believed to be the next major step in both cell phone and payment technologies. Apple's decision to avoid it is a significant blow to its adoption."
Re:Has slashdot degenerated (further) (Score:3, Informative)
I think that's a version of the problem. I don't see much in it for Apple. In the US contactless payments are not very common. There are a few systems (SpeedPay?) but I've never seen anyone use them. Carrying around a credit card is not exactly a hardship. The place where I think it would make the most sense is vending machines.
I know contactless stuff is much more common in Japan and Europe. Do they use the same system, or would Apple have to build multiple versions? I do think that if they wanted to Apple could probably pick the winning standard in the US (if there are multiple contenders, I honestly don't know).
I think it would be smarter to make a full near field communication system so that not only could you pay, but it could read tags embedded in things (ads, products, etc). Wouldn't it be nice to be able to "swipe" your phone with something (say your printer) to be able to easily pull up ink/toner options, the manual, support, etc? Why limit yourself to just paying for things?
Either way, I'm not terribly surprised by this. No one else has it (in the US), so it's not like it's costing them anything (here).
Re:Prediction (Score:5, Informative)
Prediction: if there's no accepted standard within a year, Apple will create one. Further prediction: Slashdotters will universally hate it. The remaining 99.999% of the world will love it.
Ah, what an relief for ATM-skimmers: no contact required, ISO standard doesn't yet specify [wikipedia.org] any protection against man-in-the-middle. Even if it would be so, the communication is small in size and one can easily jam the receiver and force the attempt of the same transaction enough numbers of time to have a good base for a cryptographic attack... especially since part of the encrypted information is known (the total of the docket).
Re:Most Likely Reason (Score:5, Informative)
Apple is the main patent holder in the MPEGLA group
Wow, that's the most hilarious thing I've read all day.
They hold ONE patent in the h.264 pool. Out of several hundred.
Yup, that's a "main patent holder" all right.