This is page 2 of:

Apple On Mobile Payments: “Hey Google, You Go First”

March 16th, 2011

Instead, smartphone vendors have to include both an NFC chip and an embedded secure element—hardware that controls encryption and storage of card information. Both of those chips are in the Nexus S. But, like Apple, Google has been skittish about implementing the software that talks to the secure element. And no wonder: Get that software wrong, and you’ll have far more than a minor annoyance. Head down a path that the rest of the industry decides not to take, and you’ll have to backtrack and then catch up with your competitors.

This summer, Google makes that jump first. Google has a little easier time than Apple in choosing an NFC protocol stack. Last month, a French company announced an open-source stack called OpenNFC, and Google has been working on its own open-source NFC stack project called SEEK (secure element evaluation kit). Whether Google picks one or stitches together pieces of several projects, at least Apple will be able to see what its competitor is doing.

That’s the hard part. Once Google has proven it can make an expensive smartphone act like a cheap contactless card, and Apple signs off on some compatible version of the NFC protocol stack for the iPhone, that’s when the fun begins. Apple is widely expected to use iTunes to create its own payment system for brick-and-mortar retail. (Of course, Apple was also widely expected to include NFC in the next iPhone.)

Google’s own payment system, Google Checkout, hasn’t exactly been a winner online, but it might form the basis of an in-store payment system. Or Google could focus on building an infrastructure for authenticating a customer’s identity on the fly—say, by having the smartphone communicate with the carrier to match the payment card number with the mobile account. Or it could even use something as exotic as a voiceprint—these devices are designed to talk into, after all.

Meanwhile, PayPal has announced that it, too, wants to move into in-store payments. For that, it needs smartphones that can do contactless—let’s face it, nobody really wants yet another plastic card. And social media players like Foursquare are beginning to experiment with NFC to make check-ins a lot more accurate than the current geolocation approach that uses GPS.

Once that starts happening, it will be time for retailers to let customers put their loyalty-card points on their phones, too. But not until Apple and Google get their (protocol) stacks together.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.