I seem to remember some Dallas Semiconductor Datasheets on this stuff in the mid 1990's, and I think even then, the main suggested application was Payment and Keyless Entry.
This is not news at all. They are EXPECTED to do this. It's what they did with Bluetooth also - you cannot transfer files, photos, mp3s via Bluetooth because of their misplaced sense of copyright protection....meh!
Yeahrightsure.
That's why they have a "Share" button in nearly every (probably actually IS every) App.
And besides, Bluetooth was never intended to be a mass-data-transfer protocol. It was essentially intended to be the RF version of IrDA. Apple has the "Share" button (which allows several methods of data-transfer) and AirDrop for the uses you mention for Bluetooth.
And also, in iOS 8 and OS X 10.10, there are signs that the Post-Jobs-Apple is loosening the reigns a bit. Is it wonderful yet? Meh. But, keep in mind that this is only the beginning.
...The only difference here is that there is that Apple isn't privy to your transaction data at the register - though the merchant, the bank, and VISA/MC/AMEX still are.
1. The fact that Apple isn't privy to the transaction is a significant and unique difference, data-mining-wise.
2. Please tell me how the merchant, your Bank, and the CC company can somehow conduct a transaction without the details.
That and they have you transmit a photo of your credit card (and photos are unhackable, just ask the stars who took nude selfies) instead putting the onerous task of entering twenty two digits *all by yourself* into another payment processor's web/app form. I mean, that's 15 seconds you'll never get back.
1. The picture of the card, if it is even sent to your bank, is done once, and I would guarantee it is encrypted as part of their Proprietary Setup Protocol, and is only used to establish that you actually have the card in your hand. I assume this procedure actually setup up some Public Key stuff.
2. The picture of the card may actually just be used by software in the phone itself, and again, just for the purposes of one-time Setup.
3.. Oh wait. Here's the answer. Your card-photo is obviously simply used by the phone to do OCR so users that wish can avoid having to type (Dyslexics and others do exist, and do have problems with long, unbroken strings of characters, you insensitive clod. But, as you can see from the freely-available information that you chose to ignore (that took me exactly 2 seconds to Google), you are free to spend the 15 seconds if you don't trust your own phone to do a little OCR (on an OCR font, BTW).
Google should make provision for ApplePay on android devices. Then, when Apple won't allow Google's payment app on iOS, it's time for an anti-trust investigation. Google can incorporate an authentication mechanism as powerful if possibly slightly less convenient, as Apple's thumbsmudge method.
Google CAN, but WON'T.
Apple sells computing devices. Google sells data. Specifically, your Data.
That's the difference.
And for all the Apple-Bashing that goes on around here, do you think that Google or Microsoft (remember the Microsoft Wallet?) would commit to a Privacy Policy like THIS?
Apple has come to the (correct) conclusion that people are getting more than a little sick and tired of being Data-Mined by everything and everybody. The great thing is, that as primarily a hardware company (who really only makes software to sell their hardware), Apple doesn't even have to change its Business Model one iota to (truthfully) establish itself as The platform vendor who doesn't try to make money off of the most intimate details of your LIFE...
Exactly. Most other solutions are locked down, too. E.g. my previous phone linked the NFC chip to my SIM card, so charges would go via my mobile phone bill. Except I was on prepaid, so that was a complete waste. It sounds like Apple can connect NFC with your bank and your credit card, and that's where it starts to make sense.
Actually, it is MUCH better than that.
"Apple" doesn't "connect" ANYONE. The transaction happens ONLY between you (your iPhone/Apple Watch), the merchant, and your bank. Apple is NOT in the loop. And the merchant only gets a One-Time Authorization Code. They never even get to see your CC#, Expiration Date, or CVV code.
You can transfer pictures, files, and anything else apps care to support.
Apple already has that capability; but it's far less caveman-like. It's WIRELESS. So, if you have already gotten into your respective vehicles, you can still transfer the information...
Yes, I'm talking about the almost ubiquitious "Share" Button.
Your data-transfer method reminds me of the Zune's "Squirting" feature. How quaint. We iOS users have the internets for that.
NFC technologies are already very well established here (you can wave your phone in front of a vending machine to purchase a drink!), and it's disappointing to see that iPhone users have at least a year to catch up with everybody else.
Who says that the Coca-Cola-s of the world won't get on board with the ApplePay system?
It's really only the "other-than-payment-uses" App. Devs. that are restricted at this point. For the purposes of Payment, Apple is probably anxious to say "come one, come all" to those Devs.
or Motorola - the NFC on the Moto x does pretty much everything I like, including Moto Skip for NFC unlock, Google Wallet for payments, and I can also mess around reading and writing to NFC tags
Honestly, what other uses besides Payment is NFC really useful for?. Traditional Lock and Key (Open your front door with your phone sort of thing?)
I'm not trolling. I honestly don't see many other applications.
Even if you jail break the phone, is Apple going to let an app in their store that relies on it? No. What legitimate "pay" vendor is going to risk Apple's ire and legal department to provide an independent app that bypasses the Apple Store?
A curved back makes complete sense in a phone because it's easier to hold and less likely for you to drop it. That's why almost every single mobile phone ever made up to Android/iPhone had them.
The dongle is too burdensome to run OS X on my hardware.
Ha ha. I see what you did there.
Ah, I assume you are referring to the mythical "Mac Tax" argument. So Clever. So Original. And so wrong.
So, I assume that you are building a "White Box" computer, right? Because that is the only way you will assemble a machine with a given set of specs that is significantly less expensive than "brand name" computers, regardless of the brand. And that only applies to desktops and servers.
And when it comes to laptops/notebooks, you don't have the DIY option; so the question then becomes a matter of build quality. And we all know who owns that space, hands-down.
...And now let's talk about the value of the included software (not crapware, trialware or adware; but actual, real-world-useful Applications). People like you never seem to assign any Value to that, even ones who earn their livelihood writing Application software.
And now that OS X Updates are FREE, I think we need to be focusing on The Windows Tax (which is ANYTHING but Mythical, and ANYTHING but insignificant, especially over time).
But Server 2012 is unusable. R2 improved it, but they clearly hate their customers.
1. Why does a Server install have boxes called "this PC" to click on. Just bring back "My Briefcase" and get it over with you lazy pieces of crap.
2. Why does it have a snazzy new front end that then puts back up screens we had in Windows 3.1?
That was my exact feeling. In fact, I have said multiple times about now it looks like Window 3.1... Only worse!
I have to deal with that POS GUI every single day at work. Makes me ever so glad to get home to my Mac, where I can have multiple overlapping windows, multiple desktops and real window-management.
You know what I love even more than than Win 8.1 on my Surface Pro 1? The side glances of envy from MacBook Air fanboys as they watch me use the touchscreen.
Yeahrightsure.
But what does your face look like when they do this or this?
And they didn't even have to get Gorilla Arm to do it!
I don't know how their design people allowed a protruding lens in the first place. It really runs contrary to Apple's design sensibility, but I guess we're seeing the first evidence of what happens to Apple without Jobs. The protrusion is ugly, and it mars the flat, smooth design.
And for what? Assuming that they can't make the camera any thinner, make the phone slightly fatter, and make use of the extra space. It's not as though the iPhone 5 was obscenely thick and needed to be made thinner. Hell, just fill the rest of the thing out with additional battery, and give us more battery life.
Well, you know what they say:
"You can never be too rich, or too thin; or have too much protruding bulge..."
No, the phone is shown at exactly right angles, and they're right, the lens is photoshopped out. Meanwhile, it's 1 mm. What is that, the thickness of 2 business cards?
How can you tell that it is shown at exactly right angles? All they have to do is offset the angle by the tiniest fraction and "boom", the lens bulge is obscured by the case.
As you said, it is 1mm, and they are shooting it from the other side of the phone in every photo/rendering I have seen.
I submit that you have to be able to see the back of the phone, or perhaps be "dead-on" to the side to see a "bulge" of such diminutive proportions.
But there is also the corner case of machines like I have with a 64 bit capable CPU but only 32 bit EFI for which I am endlessly trapped on Lion (10.7). Which probably doesn't count in this case, but is always a source of endless bitching for me.
How are you "Endlessly trapped on Lion?"
Apple released the OS X 10.9 "Mavericks" for FREE over a year ago. One of the design criteria for Mavericks was that it would install on any Mac on which Snow Leopard would install. Since you said you were "stuck on Lion" (10.7), which is already 64-bit only, why would this be of concern to you?
Every argument is not about defending at attacking windows UI. This one is against your misconception about GPUs being sentient beings.
So you've still not read, or understood the statement I repeated in my last post. GPU doesn't do anything on its own. It needs a driver. Lacking a driver, you cannot find a GPU, any class, that can draw a single triangle.
No fooling? With over 30 years of embedded dev. experience, I never would have thought of that! (rolls eyes)
But what I have been trying to get through everyone's collectively addled brains is this:
The excuse that "Windows' 'Moderrn UI' has to be "simple", because they have to work with a wider-range of (Desktop-Class) GPU hardware" is patently absurd, due to the fact that the Windows' software engineers (OS and Driver Devs.) should be able to code an interface with as much "UI-finesse" as what is available in OS X (which is undeniably more "advanced" than the Windows 'Modern UI'), using any reasonable "Desktop-Class" GPU.
I do believe, however, that the main reason that MS decided to make "Metro" so bog-simple (no "shading", no "textures" and no "overlapping windows"), was because they wanted (which is way different than "had to") come up with an interface that wouldn't tax the capabilities of Phone and Tablet-Class GPU hardware.
IOW, whereas Apple wisely matched the UI of OS X and iOS more closely to the TYPICAL "Class of Devices" that they were running on (Desktop vx. Mobile), MS just "raced to the bottom" with "Metro", and forced all their "Desktop" users to unnecessarily suffer from a "Lowest-Common-Denominator" UI.
In short: Microsoft took the lazy way out, and then tried to pass it off as a "Unified" UI design.
1. Microsoft made a decision - to use "primitive" graphics.
2. They have a business model where they need to support a wide variety of graphics chips.
You are saying 1 was surely not caused by the driver insanity resulting from 2. Based on what?
Jeebus! Are you just TRYING to be obtuse; or do you REALLY have a mental defect?
Based on the fact that you can't FIND a "desktop"-Class GPU, that couldn't do stuff like Apple is doing with Mission Control and Spaces, and even at least support for two monitors.
And are you REALLY here to DEFEND Windows "Modern UI", or just argue against me?
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, thanks.
I seem to remember some Dallas Semiconductor Datasheets on this stuff in the mid 1990's, and I think even then, the main suggested application was Payment and Keyless Entry.
This is not news at all. They are EXPECTED to do this. It's what they did with Bluetooth also - you cannot transfer files, photos, mp3s via Bluetooth because of their misplaced sense of copyright protection....meh!
Yeahrightsure.
That's why they have a "Share" button in nearly every (probably actually IS every) App.
And besides, Bluetooth was never intended to be a mass-data-transfer protocol. It was essentially intended to be the RF version of IrDA. Apple has the "Share" button (which allows several methods of data-transfer) and AirDrop for the uses you mention for Bluetooth.
And also, in iOS 8 and OS X 10.10, there are signs that the Post-Jobs-Apple is loosening the reigns a bit. Is it wonderful yet? Meh. But, keep in mind that this is only the beginning.
...The only difference here is that there is that Apple isn't privy to your transaction data at the register - though the merchant, the bank, and VISA/MC/AMEX still are.
1. The fact that Apple isn't privy to the transaction is a significant and unique difference, data-mining-wise.
2. Please tell me how the merchant, your Bank, and the CC company can somehow conduct a transaction without the details.
That and they have you transmit a photo of your credit card (and photos are unhackable, just ask the stars who took nude selfies) instead putting the onerous task of entering twenty two digits *all by yourself* into another payment processor's web/app form. I mean, that's 15 seconds you'll never get back.
1. The picture of the card, if it is even sent to your bank, is done once, and I would guarantee it is encrypted as part of their Proprietary Setup Protocol, and is only used to establish that you actually have the card in your hand. I assume this procedure actually setup up some Public Key stuff.
2. The picture of the card may actually just be used by software in the phone itself, and again, just for the purposes of one-time Setup.
3.. Oh wait. Here's the answer. Your card-photo is obviously simply used by the phone to do OCR so users that wish can avoid having to type (Dyslexics and others do exist, and do have problems with long, unbroken strings of characters, you insensitive clod. But, as you can see from the freely-available information that you chose to ignore (that took me exactly 2 seconds to Google), you are free to spend the 15 seconds if you don't trust your own phone to do a little OCR (on an OCR font, BTW).
. The Apple-Hate runs strong in this one...
Google should make provision for ApplePay on android devices. Then, when Apple won't allow Google's payment app on iOS, it's time for an anti-trust investigation. Google can incorporate an authentication mechanism as powerful if possibly slightly less convenient, as Apple's thumbsmudge method.
Google CAN, but WON'T.
...
Apple sells computing devices. Google sells data. Specifically, your Data.
That's the difference.
And for all the Apple-Bashing that goes on around here, do you think that Google or Microsoft (remember the Microsoft Wallet?) would commit to a Privacy Policy like THIS ?
Apple has come to the (correct) conclusion that people are getting more than a little sick and tired of being Data-Mined by everything and everybody. The great thing is, that as primarily a hardware company (who really only makes software to sell their hardware), Apple doesn't even have to change its Business Model one iota to (truthfully) establish itself as The platform vendor who doesn't try to make money off of the most intimate details of your LIFE
Exactly. Most other solutions are locked down, too. E.g. my previous phone linked the NFC chip to my SIM card, so charges would go via my mobile phone bill. Except I was on prepaid, so that was a complete waste. It sounds like Apple can connect NFC with your bank and your credit card, and that's where it starts to make sense.
Actually, it is MUCH better than that.
"Apple" doesn't "connect" ANYONE. The transaction happens ONLY between you (your iPhone/Apple Watch), the merchant, and your bank. Apple is NOT in the loop. And the merchant only gets a One-Time Authorization Code. They never even get to see your CC#, Expiration Date, or CVV code.
It's a beautiful system, seriously.
You can do whatever the hell you want, within the limitations of the hardware. That's the whole point of an open platform. Sheesh.
...and so can every shady App developer.
No thanks.
You can transfer pictures, files, and anything else apps care to support.
Apple already has that capability; but it's far less caveman-like. It's WIRELESS. So, if you have already gotten into your respective vehicles, you can still transfer the information...
Yes, I'm talking about the almost ubiquitious "Share" Button.
Your data-transfer method reminds me of the Zune's "Squirting" feature. How quaint. We iOS users have the internets for that.
NFC technologies are already very well established here (you can wave your phone in front of a vending machine to purchase a drink!), and it's disappointing to see that iPhone users have at least a year to catch up with everybody else.
Who says that the Coca-Cola-s of the world won't get on board with the ApplePay system?
It's really only the "other-than-payment-uses" App. Devs. that are restricted at this point. For the purposes of Payment, Apple is probably anxious to say "come one, come all" to those Devs.
or Motorola - the NFC on the Moto x does pretty much everything I like, including Moto Skip for NFC unlock, Google Wallet for payments, and I can also mess around reading and writing to NFC tags
Honestly, what other uses besides Payment is NFC really useful for?. Traditional Lock and Key (Open your front door with your phone sort of thing?)
I'm not trolling. I honestly don't see many other applications.
Even if you jail break the phone, is Apple going to let an app in their store that relies on it? No. What legitimate "pay" vendor is going to risk Apple's ire and legal department to provide an independent app that bypasses the Apple Store?
The operative word there is "legitimate".
A curved back makes complete sense in a phone because it's easier to hold and less likely for you to drop it. That's why almost every single mobile phone ever made up to Android/iPhone had them.
You may like them, but the feeling is far from universal.
The dongle is too burdensome to run OS X on my hardware.
Ha ha. I see what you did there.
...And now let's talk about the value of the included software (not crapware, trialware or adware; but actual, real-world-useful Applications). People like you never seem to assign any Value to that, even ones who earn their livelihood writing Application software.
Ah, I assume you are referring to the mythical "Mac Tax" argument. So Clever. So Original. And so wrong.
So, I assume that you are building a "White Box" computer, right? Because that is the only way you will assemble a machine with a given set of specs that is significantly less expensive than "brand name" computers, regardless of the brand. And that only applies to desktops and servers.
And when it comes to laptops/notebooks, you don't have the DIY option; so the question then becomes a matter of build quality. And we all know who owns that space, hands-down.
And now that OS X Updates are FREE, I think we need to be focusing on The Windows Tax (which is ANYTHING but Mythical, and ANYTHING but insignificant, especially over time).
You only use Mac. So why are you even in this discussion?
You obviously haven't a clue.
In fact, the only one of the top 3 "platforms" I don't deal with on a daily basis is Linux.
IOW, I deal with several flavors of client and server versions of Windows (7, Server 2003, 2008R2, Server 2012) plus (of course) OS X.
So, actually, At least during the workweek, I spend MUCH more time in front of Windows than I do OS X.
And besides, who died and made you Forum Nazi?
I used "Jus' Sayin' " simply to denote something that the OP wanted, that was already present in an alternative OS (OS X).
As a user of OS X since 10.0.0, IMHO, The Finder, even at it's shittiest, is head and shoulders above any "explorer" version out of Redmond.
And at least Spotlight frickin' WORKS...
You make it sound like multi-monitor and multi workspace are options of which only one can be chosen. Using two monitors and eight workspaces here!
Oh, you mean like this?
Yes. Yes it is.
But Server 2012 is unusable. R2 improved it, but they clearly hate their customers.
1. Why does a Server install have boxes called "this PC" to click on. Just bring back "My Briefcase" and get it over with you lazy pieces of crap.
2. Why does it have a snazzy new front end that then puts back up screens we had in Windows 3.1?
That was my exact feeling. In fact, I have said multiple times about now it looks like Window 3.1... Only worse!
I have to deal with that POS GUI every single day at work. Makes me ever so glad to get home to my Mac, where I can have multiple overlapping windows, multiple desktops and real window-management.
You know what I love even more than than Win 8.1 on my Surface Pro 1? The side glances of envy from MacBook Air fanboys as they watch me use the touchscreen.
Yeahrightsure.
But what does your face look like when they do this or this ?
And they didn't even have to get Gorilla Arm to do it!
If it's Transparency you want, have I got a deal for you...
Jus' Sayin'...
I don't know how their design people allowed a protruding lens in the first place. It really runs contrary to Apple's design sensibility, but I guess we're seeing the first evidence of what happens to Apple without Jobs. The protrusion is ugly, and it mars the flat, smooth design.
And for what? Assuming that they can't make the camera any thinner, make the phone slightly fatter, and make use of the extra space. It's not as though the iPhone 5 was obscenely thick and needed to be made thinner. Hell, just fill the rest of the thing out with additional battery, and give us more battery life.
Well, you know what they say:
"You can never be too rich, or too thin; or have too much protruding bulge..."
Fuck you Apple and iDiot phones you prooduce
You mean like that new HTC phone with the CURVED BACK?!?
No, the phone is shown at exactly right angles, and they're right, the lens is photoshopped out. Meanwhile, it's 1 mm. What is that, the thickness of 2 business cards?
How can you tell that it is shown at exactly right angles? All they have to do is offset the angle by the tiniest fraction and "boom", the lens bulge is obscured by the case.
As you said, it is 1mm, and they are shooting it from the other side of the phone in every photo/rendering I have seen.
I submit that you have to be able to see the back of the phone, or perhaps be "dead-on" to the side to see a "bulge" of such diminutive proportions.
That's not really "parallax" by the way.
But there is also the corner case of machines like I have with a 64 bit capable CPU but only 32 bit EFI for which I am endlessly trapped on Lion (10.7). Which probably doesn't count in this case, but is always a source of endless bitching for me.
How are you "Endlessly trapped on Lion?"
Apple released the OS X 10.9 "Mavericks" for FREE over a year ago. One of the design criteria for Mavericks was that it would install on any Mac on which Snow Leopard would install. Since you said you were "stuck on Lion" (10.7), which is already 64-bit only, why would this be of concern to you?
Every argument is not about defending at attacking windows UI. This one is against your misconception about GPUs being sentient beings.
So you've still not read, or understood the statement I repeated in my last post. GPU doesn't do anything on its own. It needs a driver. Lacking a driver, you cannot find a GPU, any class, that can draw a single triangle.
No fooling? With over 30 years of embedded dev. experience, I never would have thought of that! (rolls eyes)
But what I have been trying to get through everyone's collectively addled brains is this:
The excuse that "Windows' 'Moderrn UI' has to be "simple", because they have to work with a wider-range of (Desktop-Class) GPU hardware" is patently absurd, due to the fact that the Windows' software engineers (OS and Driver Devs.) should be able to code an interface with as much "UI-finesse" as what is available in OS X (which is undeniably more "advanced" than the Windows 'Modern UI'), using any reasonable "Desktop-Class" GPU.
I do believe, however, that the main reason that MS decided to make "Metro" so bog-simple (no "shading", no "textures" and no "overlapping windows"), was because they wanted (which is way different than "had to" ) come up with an interface that wouldn't tax the capabilities of Phone and Tablet-Class GPU hardware.
IOW, whereas Apple wisely matched the UI of OS X and iOS more closely to the TYPICAL "Class of Devices" that they were running on (Desktop vx. Mobile), MS just "raced to the bottom" with "Metro", and forced all their "Desktop" users to unnecessarily suffer from a "Lowest-Common-Denominator" UI.
In short: Microsoft took the lazy way out, and then tried to pass it off as a "Unified" UI design.
OK, so
1. Microsoft made a decision - to use "primitive" graphics.
2. They have a business model where they need to support a wide variety of graphics chips.
You are saying 1 was surely not caused by the driver insanity resulting from 2. Based on what?
Jeebus! Are you just TRYING to be obtuse; or do you REALLY have a mental defect?
Based on the fact that you can't FIND a "desktop"-Class GPU, that couldn't do stuff like Apple is doing with Mission Control and Spaces, and even at least support for two monitors.
And are you REALLY here to DEFEND Windows "Modern UI", or just argue against me?