Any company that contracts out their POS terminals and accepts credit and debit cards (so, just about everyone) can get a terminal that accepts NFC payments.
My local large grocery story (Albertson's, in southern California) has accepted Apple Pay from the start, even though their terminals don't look any different than anyone else's, and don't have the typical separate plastic thing that you're supposed to touch your phone to. The whole thing is built into the user-accessible terminal, and Apple Pay just works.
Stores don't own these terminals, and the companies that provide/service them can either turn on the functionality (if the terminal has it built in) or replace the terminal with a newer model (which happens regularly anyway). It's not a matter of having to run new lines out to the boonies - if they take credit cards, they can likely accept NFC payments.
Staples accepts NFC payments, so if I buy something there, I'm using ApplePay, which is a single-use token and more secure than anything else out there, as far as I can tell.
Except that I'm going to have my phone with me anyway - it's not just for making payments (so the theft/damage argument is irrelevant). And I can still lend a card to my wife, and still use it myself. But now I also have a quick, secure option with my phone that's worked 3 out of the three times I've tried it.
So if someone steals your wallet, they can buy everything they want under $100, without having to know your pin? And they can do this until you report it stolen? Is that somehow better than Apple Pay that is useless without my biometrics?
That article mentions the ways Apple Pay is better than credit cards, then goes off the deep end mentioning a bunch of generic studies about the possibilities of connecting data-mined information to individuals, then somehow implies that Apple Pay is specifically victim to these problems. Troll article.
Given legalization is extremely new, the conclusion of the article and study is grossly premature. Making matters worse in my opinion, is that the study only looks at a single element of drugs, and not the complete impact.
...it's hardly even started filming yet. Maybe wait until it's released to worry?
Or better yet, don't worry. Skip it entirely if you can't hold "sequel" and "rose-tinted memories of the originals" in your brain at the same time. No one's ruining your childhood if you just stay home...
That's a wonderful idea. But since almost no Americans have compatible cards (and no vendors have compatible systems), that does us ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD. Instead, we're talking about current reality, where my scanning my phone is a pretty quick way to pay for coffee.
The scanner has a wire long enough to pull through the window, so I don't even need to hand them my phone. That's been the case at every Starbucks drive-thru around here, and even if it didn't, it would still be faster than a credit card or cash/change.
Where are you buying coffee? All the Starbucks around here have phone scanners on the counter, and the exchange is at least a few seconds quicker than handing over a credit card or dealing with cash (and change).
None of the streaming providers like Netflix are just going to "turn off" the old, non-H.265 streams just because one device gets them. And since none of them are even using them at all right now, I'd say we have many years before Netflix will phase them out (if ever - they still have non-adaptive streams and older interfaces for legacy devices, which still work just fine) .
Hulu+ is $8/month. You've got a bit of a wait if you've using that money to pay for a PC.
We're at a point in content rights where not everything is available on set-top boxes. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't use a set-top box for everything else. Car analogy: It's like using a gas-guzzling truck for your everyday commute, because your economy car can't move a piano.
If you have to buy a remote and IR sensor, and configure WMC (or an equivalent), it's not free, and can be a pain in the ass. Not to mention that the UI, speed, noise, and electricity cost in the set-top boxes are all serious considerations when compared to an old computer you might just have hanging around.
Roku (and I assume the other set top boxes) make it amazingly simple and quick to stream media. I have a Windows machine running WMC as an OTA DVR, and while it can stream Netflix and some of the other applications, it's not anywhere near as good at it.
Exactly. The vast majority of internet users (even those that can network their own houses and fix their friend's computers) don't know what a "hop" is or that there are usually a dozen+ computers between them and their internet destination. And if any of these links is slow, for whatever reason, there's going to a general slowdown. That makes it very difficult to determine if you're being throttled, if you're the victim of bad DNS routing, or if there's some random problem that you can't solve from your end.
You could actually upgrade, and as long as the old YouTube channel was tied to your account (and you linked your new Roku to your existing account), it would show up on your new box as well. It's on all three of mine.
There was (and still is) a private YouTube channel, but Roku stopped it from being added to boxes a few years ago. But if you already had that one, you could keep it (I still have it).
Slashdot Mirror
Any company that contracts out their POS terminals and accepts credit and debit cards (so, just about everyone) can get a terminal that accepts NFC payments.
My local large grocery story (Albertson's, in southern California) has accepted Apple Pay from the start, even though their terminals don't look any different than anyone else's, and don't have the typical separate plastic thing that you're supposed to touch your phone to. The whole thing is built into the user-accessible terminal, and Apple Pay just works.
Stores don't own these terminals, and the companies that provide/service them can either turn on the functionality (if the terminal has it built in) or replace the terminal with a newer model (which happens regularly anyway). It's not a matter of having to run new lines out to the boonies - if they take credit cards, they can likely accept NFC payments.
Staples accepts NFC payments, so if I buy something there, I'm using ApplePay, which is a single-use token and more secure than anything else out there, as far as I can tell.
Oddly enough, though, the Home Depot locations around here still have their NFC terminals working, so I've been able to use Apple Pay.
Find me a single theater that requires you to TURN OFF your phone (instead of just putting it on silent, and putting it away).
I wouldn't give my money to one at all. Some of us need our phones to be on.
So I can't use Google Glass, but I'm free to bring in my smart phone, which has an HD camera and likely better quality? Good work there, MPAA.
Except that I'm going to have my phone with me anyway - it's not just for making payments (so the theft/damage argument is irrelevant). And I can still lend a card to my wife, and still use it myself. But now I also have a quick, secure option with my phone that's worked 3 out of the three times I've tried it.
So if someone steals your wallet, they can buy everything they want under $100, without having to know your pin? And they can do this until you report it stolen? Is that somehow better than Apple Pay that is useless without my biometrics?
That article mentions the ways Apple Pay is better than credit cards, then goes off the deep end mentioning a bunch of generic studies about the possibilities of connecting data-mined information to individuals, then somehow implies that Apple Pay is specifically victim to these problems. Troll article.
Given legalization is extremely new, the conclusion of the article and study is grossly premature. Making matters worse in my opinion, is that the study only looks at a single element of drugs, and not the complete impact.
California legalized marijuana 18 years ago, in 1996. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
...it's hardly even started filming yet. Maybe wait until it's released to worry?
Or better yet, don't worry. Skip it entirely if you can't hold "sequel" and "rose-tinted memories of the originals" in your brain at the same time. No one's ruining your childhood if you just stay home...
That's a wonderful idea. But since almost no Americans have compatible cards (and no vendors have compatible systems), that does us ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD. Instead, we're talking about current reality, where my scanning my phone is a pretty quick way to pay for coffee.
The scanner has a wire long enough to pull through the window, so I don't even need to hand them my phone. That's been the case at every Starbucks drive-thru around here, and even if it didn't, it would still be faster than a credit card or cash/change.
Where are you buying coffee? All the Starbucks around here have phone scanners on the counter, and the exchange is at least a few seconds quicker than handing over a credit card or dealing with cash (and change).
None of the streaming providers like Netflix are just going to "turn off" the old, non-H.265 streams just because one device gets them. And since none of them are even using them at all right now, I'd say we have many years before Netflix will phase them out (if ever - they still have non-adaptive streams and older interfaces for legacy devices, which still work just fine) .
Hulu+ is $8/month. You've got a bit of a wait if you've using that money to pay for a PC.
We're at a point in content rights where not everything is available on set-top boxes. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't use a set-top box for everything else. Car analogy: It's like using a gas-guzzling truck for your everyday commute, because your economy car can't move a piano.
If you have to buy a remote and IR sensor, and configure WMC (or an equivalent), it's not free, and can be a pain in the ass. Not to mention that the UI, speed, noise, and electricity cost in the set-top boxes are all serious considerations when compared to an old computer you might just have hanging around.
Roku (and I assume the other set top boxes) make it amazingly simple and quick to stream media. I have a Windows machine running WMC as an OTA DVR, and while it can stream Netflix and some of the other applications, it's not anywhere near as good at it.
Because they have huge contracts with cable companies that say they won't. This isn't the fault of the set-top boxes.
Yeah, I'm seeing my mistake now. Too much/not enough coffee...
"The 2 dollar plan per month means that the price for a gigabyte gets down to an incredibly low price of only two cents per month."
Translation, please. I must have missed something.
That's only because no one is using it. Maybe your friends post stuff you don't like, but that seems like a problem with your friends, not the medium.
Exactly. The vast majority of internet users (even those that can network their own houses and fix their friend's computers) don't know what a "hop" is or that there are usually a dozen+ computers between them and their internet destination. And if any of these links is slow, for whatever reason, there's going to a general slowdown. That makes it very difficult to determine if you're being throttled, if you're the victim of bad DNS routing, or if there's some random problem that you can't solve from your end.
You could actually upgrade, and as long as the old YouTube channel was tied to your account (and you linked your new Roku to your existing account), it would show up on your new box as well. It's on all three of mine.
That's a known issue with the old YouTube and several other private channels. Company reps on the Roku message boards say they're looking into it.
No wireless/bluetooth keyboard, but the Roku phone/tablet app has a keyboard option on the remote.
There was (and still is) a private YouTube channel, but Roku stopped it from being added to boxes a few years ago. But if you already had that one, you could keep it (I still have it).