Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #140781 > unrolled thread

Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> - 2024-05-04 00:29 +0100
    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-03 21:01 -0700
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-05-04 02:05 -0500
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-04 16:49 +0200
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-04 10:22 +0200
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 12:49 -0700
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-05 16:15 +0200
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-04 11:03 +0200
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2024-05-04 11:16 +0100
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> - 2024-05-04 11:31 +0100
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 13:01 -0700
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay tony@mountifield.org (Tony Mountifield) - 2024-05-07 17:06 +0000
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> - 2024-05-08 13:26 +0100
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Newyana2 <Newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2024-05-04 09:31 -0400
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 13:06 -0700
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-05-04 17:23 -0500
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-05 16:17 +0200
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2024-05-08 08:25 -0700
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-08 08:59 -0700
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2024-05-08 23:19 -0700
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-09 07:40 -0700
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2024-05-12 11:21 -0700
                Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-12 12:00 -0700
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2024-05-12 11:24 -0700
    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-05-04 01:59 -0500
    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-04 10:22 +0200
    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-04 11:06 +0200
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2024-05-04 11:20 +0100
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-04 12:31 +0200
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 13:03 -0700
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 13:44 -0700
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-05 14:15 +0000
                Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-05 16:23 +0200
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-05-04 15:51 -0500
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> - 2024-05-04 23:54 +0100
                Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2024-05-04 21:54 -0500
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-04 20:35 -0700
                    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2024-05-05 10:45 +0100
                      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> - 2024-05-05 13:14 +0100
                        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-05 11:00 -0700
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> - 2024-05-05 09:56 +0100
                    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-05 11:12 +0200
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2024-05-05 10:37 +0100
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-05 14:13 +0000
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2024-05-06 15:12 +0100
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2024-05-05 10:28 +0100
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-05 15:50 +0200
                Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-06 10:06 +0200
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-05 16:22 +0200
                Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2024-05-05 11:06 -0700
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-05 20:10 +0200
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-06 08:07 +0200
                    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-06 09:34 +0200
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Bob Henson <bob.henson@outlook.com> - 2024-05-06 08:35 +0100
                  Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-06 10:09 +0200
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2024-05-05 14:33 +0000
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-05 16:24 +0200
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2024-05-08 15:12 +0300
    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-04 16:46 +0200
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-05 15:53 +0200
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-05 16:32 +0200
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-06 10:19 +0200
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 08:51 +0200
    Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-05-06 07:45 -0400
      Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2024-05-07 09:45 +0200
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-07 16:01 +0200
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-07 17:41 +0200
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-09 16:48 +0200
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2024-05-09 17:43 +0200
        Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay bad sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-05-07 12:00 -0400
          Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-09 17:03 +0200
            Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay bad💽sector <forgetski@_INVALID.net> - 2024-05-10 08:04 -0400
              Re: Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2024-05-12 09:31 +0200

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#140781 — Samsung Wallet vs Google Pay

Any preferences here - and why?


-- 
Jim the Geordie

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#140782

On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
> Any preferences here - and why?

I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
with a credit card which gives you a rebate?


-- 
Cheers, Bev
   VISE GRIPS (VYS'-gripz) [n]  A tool used to transfer intense
   welding heat to the palm of the welder's hand.         -- DS

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140784

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> Jim the Geordie wrote:
>
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?

I would think whether you get cashback, or not, from your mobile payment
app (e.g., Google Wallet, Samsung Wallet, Apple Pay, etc) depends on who
is the backing institution for the financial transactions.

https://support.google.com/wallet/thread/211538270/how-can-i-get-cashback-from-google-wallet-from-my-phone

Likely you can't use reward programs, like getting points accrued with
purchases that you can use to discount other purchases (e.g., gas
discount with purchases from a grocery store or pharmacy).  But then
most rewards programs use their own separate customer cards to track
reward grants at purchase.  Rewards programs aren't cashback programs.
Rebates are mostly company script programs: you can only spend the
rebate credits at the store where you accrued them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140798

On 04.05.24 09:05, VanguardLH wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Jim the Geordie wrote:
>>
>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>
>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong
>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 
> I would think whether you get cashback, or not, from your mobile payment
> app (e.g., Google Wallet, Samsung Wallet, Apple Pay, etc) depends on who
> is the backing institution for the financial transactions.
> 
> https://support.google.com/wallet/thread/211538270/how-can-i-get-cashback-from-google-wallet-from-my-phone
> 
> Likely you can't use reward programs, like getting points accrued with
> purchases that you can use to discount other purchases (e.g., gas
> discount with purchases from a grocery store or pharmacy).  But then
> most rewards programs use their own separate customer cards to track
> reward grants at purchase.  Rewards programs aren't cashback programs.
> Rebates are mostly company script programs: you can only spend the
> rebate credits at the store where you accrued them.

Economically these are pervers schemes to systematically disguise the 
true costs of goods and services and to limit fair competition.

-- 
"Mille viae ducunt hominem per saecula Romam." (Alanus ab Insulis 1120-1202)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140785

On 2024-05-04 06:01, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?

No rebate here.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140801

On 5/4/24 1:22 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-05-04 06:01, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>> 
>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 
> No rebate here.

A free Citibank card gives 2% back on everything.  A free US Bank card 
gives 5% back on ut8lities.  I don't see how tapping/sliding the card on 
the machine could be any more difficult than <whatever-pay/wallet>.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
   "Never keep up with the Joneses. Drag them down to your level.
    It's cheaper."                  -- Quentin Crisp 1908 - 1999

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140828

On 2024-05-04 21:49, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/4/24 1:22 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2024-05-04 06:01, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>>
>>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
>>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
>>
>> No rebate here.
> 
> A free Citibank card gives 2% back on everything.  A free US Bank card 
> gives 5% back on ut8lities.  I don't see how tapping/sliding the card on 
> the machine could be any more difficult than <whatever-pay/wallet>.

It is easier when the phone is already in your hand. Probably I have 
already used the phone to get the supermarket application for rebates 
and things.

Close the phone, and get out my purse from my pocket? Slower.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140787

The Real Bev, 2024-05-04 06:01:

> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?

You don't need to take the credit card with you and payments are only
possible when at least the screen is active which is more secure than
just using NFC without any protection at all. Often smaller amounts can
be booked without PIN confirmation to make NFC more "convinient". But
this also means anyone using a mobile NFC reader can just get money from
your card.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140789

On 4.5.24 5:01 am, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 
> 
If your credit card gives you rebate, you will still get it when using 
that card via Google Pay - or Paypal, too. In the UK is my Amex card 
gives me the most cashback, but some retailers won't accept it directly 
because Amex charge them such high fees. Using Amex  via Google or 
Paypal I still get the cashback and the same retailers accept the 
payment without question. The downside is that you may not get Section 
75 protection via a third party (but may still get chargeback from the 
bank and Paypal have their own cover), but as we don't get Section 75 
cover below £100 anyway in the UK, that is no loss to me. If I'm buying 
items over £100 I use the credit card direct.

-- 
Tetbury, Gloucestershire , UK

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140791

In article <v14bui$1117t$1@dont-email.me>, bashley101@gmail.com says...
> 
> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
> > Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?

You can use credit cards as well as debit.
I use it because I always I always have my phone, but seldom carry my 
card.
Yes I have a Samsung or I wouldn't have asked and yes I have NFC.

I simply wondered whether the physical action of paying is simpler with 
one or are they both the same.
The question arises because I often get asked (by a bloody machine!) to 
try my fingerprint again when it had already accepted it 5 seconds 
earlir. Grr.

These answers are to the group and not particularly to you Bev.

-- 
Jim the Geordie

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140802

On 5/4/24 3:31 AM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
> In article <v14bui$1117t$1@dont-email.me>, bashley101@gmail.com says...
>> 
>> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>> > Any preferences here - and why?
>> 
>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 
> You can use credit cards as well as debit.

So it's just another layer? I can see how it would be handy if you can 
use your watch.  Is such a smartwatch usable all by itself, or does it 
have to be in contact with your phone?

> I use it because I always I always have my phone, but seldom carry my
> card.

Exactly the opposite.  I walk to the gym and can just put the card in my 
velcro-flap pocket without worrying about it falling out or me falling 
on it and breaking it -- just in case I want to stop at Trader Joe's or 
the supermarket on my way home.  I only carry my phone when I think I 
might need it or want to use the camera.

> Yes I have a Samsung or I wouldn't have asked and yes I have NFC.
> 
> I simply wondered whether the physical action of paying is simpler with
> one or are they both the same.
> The question arises because I often get asked (by a bloody machine!) to
> try my fingerprint again when it had already accepted it 5 seconds
> earlir. Grr.

The fingerprint reader at the gym I used before The Plague ALWAYS failed 
and required assistance from the attendant. I refuse to use the reader 
on my phone, which is probably even less reliable.

> These answers are to the group and not particularly to you Bev.

That's why we have groups :-)


-- 
Cheers, Bev
   My computer doesn't have to be friendly;
   civil is entirely sufficient.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140927

In article <MPG.40a01ed34f6ff8e098970b@paganini.bofh.team>,
Jim the Geordie  <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> wrote:
> Yes I have a Samsung or I wouldn't have asked and yes I have NFC.
> 
> I simply wondered whether the physical action of paying is simpler with 
> one or are they both the same.
> The question arises because I often get asked (by a bloody machine!) to 
> try my fingerprint again when it had already accepted it 5 seconds 
> earlir. Grr.

I noticed this annoying feature which started relatively recently with Google Pay.

After doing some research, I found that Google made an update a couple of
months ago, such that every transaction requires that you have been
biometrically validated within the last few minutes. On my phone (Xiaomi),
Face Unlock is no longer considered sufficient, but fingerprint is. So if I
unlock with face recognition and then try to tap on a pay terminal, it fails,
then asks me for my fingerprint, then tries to pay again, hopefully with
success. Some terminals will need the retailer to reset the transaction before
you can retry.

There are two workarounds that I found:

1. Turn off face unlock, so that I always needed to use fingerprint to unlock.
I tried this for a while, but it lost a lot of convenience in day-to-day use
of the phone.

2. When about to pay for something, open the Google Wallet app, and look above
your card image for a box that says "For your security, you need to verify
that it's you before paying." with a blue link "Verify that it's you". Tap on
the link just before trying to pay, enter your fingerprint, and then tap the
phone on the pay terminal.  The box will disappear and the payment should then
work first time. There is a timeout of two or three minutes (I haven't timed
it, but it's not as short as "5 seconds") before the app will ask again for
you to verify. OK, this is more steps than just unlock and pay, but this is
the procedure I now use, as paying for something is much less frequent than
needing just to unlock my phone, and there is time to open the app while the
retailer is entering the transaction.

Hope this helps
Tony

-- 
Tony Mountifield
Winchester, UK

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140942

In article <v1dn2p$pp8$1@softins.softins.co.uk>, tony@mountifield.org 
says...
> 
> In article <MPG.40a01ed34f6ff8e098970b@paganini.bofh.team>,
> Jim the Geordie  <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> wrote:
> > Yes I have a Samsung or I wouldn't have asked and yes I have NFC.
> > 
> > I simply wondered whether the physical action of paying is simpler with 
> > one or are they both the same.
> > The question arises because I often get asked (by a bloody machine!) to 
> > try my fingerprint again when it had already accepted it 5 seconds 
> > earlir. Grr.
> 
> I noticed this annoying feature which started relatively recently with Google Pay.
> 
> After doing some research, I found that Google made an update a couple of
> months ago, such that every transaction requires that you have been
> biometrically validated within the last few minutes. On my phone (Xiaomi),
> Face Unlock is no longer considered sufficient, but fingerprint is. So if I
> unlock with face recognition and then try to tap on a pay terminal, it fails,
> then asks me for my fingerprint, then tries to pay again, hopefully with
> success. Some terminals will need the retailer to reset the transaction before
> you can retry.
> 
> There are two workarounds that I found:
> 
> 1. Turn off face unlock, so that I always needed to use fingerprint to unlock.
> I tried this for a while, but it lost a lot of convenience in day-to-day use
> of the phone.
> 
> 2. When about to pay for something, open the Google Wallet app, and look above
> your card image for a box that says "For your security, you need to verify
> that it's you before paying." with a blue link "Verify that it's you". Tap on
> the link just before trying to pay, enter your fingerprint, and then tap the
> phone on the pay terminal.  The box will disappear and the payment should then
> work first time. There is a timeout of two or three minutes (I haven't timed
> it, but it's not as short as "5 seconds") before the app will ask again for
> you to verify. OK, this is more steps than just unlock and pay, but this is
> the procedure I now use, as paying for something is much less frequent than
> needing just to unlock my phone, and there is time to open the app while the
> retailer is entering the transaction.
> 
> Hope this helps
> Tony

Thanks Tony. Nice to have someone answering my question without raising 
the moral question of cash vs card/phone.
After a bit of experimentation I find the Samsung Wallet easier to use. 
It always asks for fingerprint. Google offers options.

-- 
Jim the Geordie

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140795

On 5/4/2024 12:01 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 

  I think it's just part of the cellphone ubiquity trend. People
don't want to have to leave their cellphone for anything.
For a non-cellphone-addict it's an awkward bottleneck to
use 3rd-party (spyware) pay services. For the average
cellphone addict (90+% of people) it seems like a brilliant
idea to just set up one e-servant to handle all of your
transactions and paperwork.

   That's becoming increasingly true. Just a few years ago,
Apple Pay and "wallets" were not accepted in most places.
Today, in urban areas, it's possible to live almost exclusively
by cellphone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140805

On 5/4/24 6:31 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
> On 5/4/2024 12:01 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>> 
>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 
>    I think it's just part of the cellphone ubiquity trend. People
> don't want to have to leave their cellphone for anything.
> For a non-cellphone-addict it's an awkward bottleneck to
> use 3rd-party (spyware) pay services. For the average
> cellphone addict (90+% of people) it seems like a brilliant
> idea to just set up one e-servant to handle all of your
> transactions and paperwork.

So you pay the bill to the wallet entity rather than the credit card 
entity?  What if you use different cards at different stores/functions?

>     That's becoming increasingly true. Just a few years ago,
> Apple Pay and "wallets" were not accepted in most places.
> Today, in urban areas, it's possible to live almost exclusively
> by cellphone.

I posit that such a life is inadequate.


-- 
Cheers, Bev
   My computer doesn't have to be friendly;
   civil is entirely sufficient.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140809

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> So you pay the bill to the wallet entity rather than the credit card 
> entity?  What if you use different cards at different stores/functions?

https://support.google.com/wallet/topic/11925503

You can multiple payment methods recorded in the mobile pay app.  You
pick which to use unless the default one is what you want to use.  You
aren't getting a credit line at Google.  You still use the ones you
have.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140829

On 2024-05-04 22:06, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/4/24 6:31 AM, Newyana2 wrote:
>> On 5/4/2024 12:01 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>>
>>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
>>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
>>
>>    I think it's just part of the cellphone ubiquity trend. People
>> don't want to have to leave their cellphone for anything.
>> For a non-cellphone-addict it's an awkward bottleneck to
>> use 3rd-party (spyware) pay services. For the average
>> cellphone addict (90+% of people) it seems like a brilliant
>> idea to just set up one e-servant to handle all of your
>> transactions and paperwork.
> 
> So you pay the bill to the wallet entity rather than the credit card 
> entity?  What if you use different cards at different stores/functions?

No bills.
You can have several cards in Google Wallet.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140944

On 5/3/2024 9:01 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?

One reason for me is that I have a credit card that gives 3% cash back 
for Apple Pay, Google Pay, and Samsung Pay. The best I have for a 
physical card is 2% cash back. So we always pay with the phone when 
possible (not possible at Home Depot, Lowe's, or Walmart).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140946

On 5/8/24 8:25 AM, sms wrote:
> On 5/3/2024 9:01 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 5/3/24 4:29 PM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>> 
>> I have often wondered about the value of any of these.  What's wrong 
>> with a credit card which gives you a rebate?
> 
> One reason for me is that I have a credit card that gives 3% cash back
> for Apple Pay, Google Pay, and Samsung Pay. The best I have for a
> physical card is 2% cash back. So we always pay with the phone when
> possible (not possible at Home Depot, Lowe's, or Walmart).

Which card is that?  Going back through my old email I find that I 
actually signed up for google pay with a long-defunct credit card.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
    "Yahoo has released its own search engine. For more info,
     type 'yahoo search engine' into Google."       -D.Miller

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#140964

On 5/8/2024 8:59 AM, The Real Bev wrote:

<snip>

> Which card is that?  Going back through my old email I find that I 
> actually signed up for google pay with a long-defunct credit card.
> 

US Bank Altitude Reserve. It has a net $75 annual fee ($400-$325), but, 
for me, the benefits outweigh that $75.

1. 3% cash back on electronic wallet purchases (break even versus a 2% 
card is $7500 per year). Or 4.5% if you purchase travel with the card.[I 
have used this multiple times]

2. Primary rental car insurance, not secondary.[I have used this 
multiple times]

3. Global Entry reimbursement (equivalent to $25 per year)[I have used this]

4. Priority Pass membership (8x per year) [I have used this multiple times]

5. One year extended warranty coverage (many cards have dropped this 
feature, including the Costco Citibank Visa)

6. $500 sign-up bonus [I have used this and it covers nearly seven years 
of the $75 net annual fee]

Plus some stuff that is pretty worthless, or that I'd be unlikely to 
ever use, or hopefully not ever need to use:

7. 90 day theft and loss coverage

8. Identity theft coverage

9. Emergency evacuation coverage

10. Repatriation of remains

11. Lost luggage reimbursement

12. Trip delay reimbursement

13. Emergency travel services

14. Trip cancellation coverage

15. Travel accident insurance

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web