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 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#140968

On 5/8/24 11:19 PM, sms wrote:
> 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]

All cards used to offer this, but I don't think any of the ones I have 
now do.

> 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)

Costco still offers the second year on appliances.  I was shocked to 
find that Samsung only gives a single year on expensive appliances. 
Cheesy, and I won't be buying a Samsung refrigerator.  Or anything else.

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

Definitely a plus.

> 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

Somebody else's problem!

> 11. Lost luggage reimbursement
> 
> 12. Trip delay reimbursement
> 
> 13. Emergency travel services
> 
> 14. Trip cancellation coverage
> 
> 15. Travel accident insurance

Thanks.  Seems useful.


-- 
Cheers, Bev
    Rule 18:  Always tip your hat before striking a lady.

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

#141051

On 5/9/2024 7:40 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/8/24 11:19 PM, sms wrote:
>> 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]
> 
> All cards used to offer this, but I don't think any of the ones I have 
> now do.

No, all cards used to offer secondary coverage, that is it kicked in 
only after you used your own car insurance, if any.

Only a few cards offer, or offered, primary coverage.

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

#141055

On 5/12/24 11:21 AM, sms wrote:
> On 5/9/2024 7:40 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 5/8/24 11:19 PM, sms wrote:
>>> 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]
>> 
>> All cards used to offer this, but I don't think any of the ones I have 
>> now do.
> 
> No, all cards used to offer secondary coverage, that is it kicked in
> only after you used your own car insurance, if any.

Since I don't carry collision (only liability and comprehensive) this 
might be useful if I ever had to rent a car again.

> Only a few cards offer, or offered, primary coverage.


-- 
Cheers, Bev

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

#141052

On 5/8/2024 11:19 PM, sms wrote:

Also, one big benefit I forgot to mention, is that when you purchase 
travel through their portal, you get 50% more for your "points" versus 
cash. Not much of a deal for hotels, since the portal prices are higher, 
but a great deal for airline tickets.

So that 3% turns into 4.5%.

-- 
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it 
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not 
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as 
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

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

#140783

Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> wrote:

> Any preferences here - and why?

Naming is confusing.  Google introduced Wallet in 2011, changed to Pay
in 2015, and then back to Wallet in 2022.  Google Pay shuts down in
2024, and Google Wallet takes over.  Samsung started with Pay in 2015,
but changed to Wallet in some countries.  Sounds like a bad takeoff on
the "Who's on First" skit.  Looks like Wallet is the current term for
both services.

The only time a comparison between these has value is *if* you have a
Samsung phone.  Samsung Wallet is locked to Samsung Galaxy phones.  On a
Samsung phone, you can elect to use Samsung Wallet or Google Pay.  On
non-Samsung phones, it's just Google Pay, or some other mobile pay app
other than Samsung Wallet.  What phone you have dicatates which you can
use.  Apple has their own Pay for their walled garden platform.

Do you have a Samsung Galaxy phone?  For a non-Samsung phone, does yours
have the NFC (Near Field Communication) radio?  This is an Android
newsgroup, but another point is Google Wallet is not available for
iPhones.

https://www.androidpolice.com/google-wallet-vs-samsung-pay-mobile-payment-apps/

Which you can use depends on which the retailer supports.  Maybe they
accept both, but they may accept only one.  Most stores will accept my
American Express credit card, but some don't.  Since Samsung phones can
use either Samsung Wallet or Google Wallet, and presuming you set up
both, you won't get rejected at the retailer.  Use whichever works.

https://www.businessofapps.com/data/mobile-payments-app-market/
(see "Mobile payments users by app" section for app usage chart.)

According to the above article, Google Wallet has wider acceptance than
Samsung Wallet.  When looking at market share of mobile payment apps,
it's Apple Pay and Google Wallet at the top.  Samsung Wallet is a
distant third.  It's popularity is primarily with Samsung Galaxy phone
owners.

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

#140786

On 2024-05-04 01:29, Jim the Geordie wrote:
> Any preferences here - and why?

I don't have a Samsung, so it has to be Google pay.


If I have the phone already out, to use the supermarket app when paying 
(dynamic discounts), then paying with the phone is easier/faster.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

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

#140788

Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:

> Any preferences here - and why?

Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.

So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
Ticwatch Pro 5.

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#140790

On 4.5.24 10:06 am, Arno Welzel wrote:
> Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:
> 
>> Any preferences here - and why?
> 
> Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
> Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.
> 
> So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
> can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
> Ticwatch Pro 5.
> 

The ability to pay by smartwatch is very handy - I use it nearly all the 
time. It has an additional advantage - when paying bills to young 
counter assistants or waiters, they can't believe that an old geezer of 
80 can understand the technology when they frequently struggle with it. 
I like to score the odd point for the old folk when I can <grin>

-- 
Tetbury, Gloucestershire , UK

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

#140792

On 2024-05-04 12:20, Bob Henson wrote:
> On 4.5.24 10:06 am, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:
>>
>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>
>> Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
>> Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.
>>
>> So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
>> can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
>> Ticwatch Pro 5.
>>
> 
> The ability to pay by smartwatch is very handy - I use it nearly all the 
> time. It has an additional advantage - when paying bills to young 
> counter assistants or waiters, they can't believe that an old geezer of 
> 80 can understand the technology when they frequently struggle with it. 
> I like to score the odd point for the old folk when I can <grin>

Heh. You have convinced me :-D

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

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

#140803

On 5/4/24 3:31 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2024-05-04 12:20, Bob Henson wrote:
>> On 4.5.24 10:06 am, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>> Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:
>>>
>>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>>
>>> Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
>>> Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.
>>>
>>> So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
>>> can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
>>> Ticwatch Pro 5.
>>>
>> 
>> The ability to pay by smartwatch is very handy - I use it nearly all the 
>> time. It has an additional advantage - when paying bills to young 
>> counter assistants or waiters, they can't believe that an old geezer of 
>> 80 can understand the technology when they frequently struggle with it. 
>> I like to score the odd point for the old folk when I can <grin>

Hrm.  The youngsters need to be reminded that their grandparents 
INVENTED computers.

> Heh. You have convinced me :-D

Little point in trying to educate the stupid


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

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

#140807

On 5/4/24 1:03 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/4/24 3:31 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2024-05-04 12:20, Bob Henson wrote:
>>> On 4.5.24 10:06 am, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>>> Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:
>>>>
>>>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>>>
>>>> Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
>>>> Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.
>>>>
>>>> So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
>>>> can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
>>>> Ticwatch Pro 5.
>>>>
>>> 
>>> The ability to pay by smartwatch is very handy - I use it nearly all the 
>>> time. It has an additional advantage - when paying bills to young 
>>> counter assistants or waiters, they can't believe that an old geezer of 
>>> 80 can understand the technology when they frequently struggle with it. 
>>> I like to score the odd point for the old folk when I can <grin>
> 
> Hrm.  The youngsters need to be reminded that their grandparents
> INVENTED computers.
> 
>> Heh. You have convinced me :-D
> 
> Little point in trying to educate the stupid

Not you, the youngsters!


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

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

#140827

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/4/24 1:03 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> > On 5/4/24 3:31 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> >> On 2024-05-04 12:20, Bob Henson wrote:
> >>> On 4.5.24 10:06 am, Arno Welzel wrote:
> >>>> Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Any preferences here - and why?
> >>>>
> >>>> Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
> >>>> Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.
> >>>>
> >>>> So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
> >>>> can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
> >>>> Ticwatch Pro 5.
> >>> 
> >>> The ability to pay by smartwatch is very handy - I use it nearly all the 
> >>> time. It has an additional advantage - when paying bills to young 
> >>> counter assistants or waiters, they can't believe that an old geezer of 
> >>> 80 can understand the technology when they frequently struggle with it. 
> >>> I like to score the odd point for the old folk when I can <grin>
> > 
> > Hrm.  The youngsters need to be reminded that their grandparents
> > INVENTED computers.
> > 
> >> Heh. You have convinced me :-D
> > 
> > Little point in trying to educate the stupid
> 
> Not you, the youngsters!

  But, for most of us, he (Carlos) *is* a youngster! :-)

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

#140830

On 2024-05-05 16:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/4/24 1:03 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 5/4/24 3:31 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> On 2024-05-04 12:20, Bob Henson wrote:
>>>>> On 4.5.24 10:06 am, Arno Welzel wrote:
>>>>>> Jim the Geordie, 2024-05-04 01:29:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any preferences here - and why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Samsung Wallet only works with Samsung devices but not on my ancient
>>>>>> Samsung Gear S3 and probably also not because I am not based in US.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I use Google Wallet ("Google Pay" was renamed) which works fine and
>>>>>> can even be used in newer smartwatches if they are based on WearOS like
>>>>>> Ticwatch Pro 5.
>>>>>
>>>>> The ability to pay by smartwatch is very handy - I use it nearly all the
>>>>> time. It has an additional advantage - when paying bills to young
>>>>> counter assistants or waiters, they can't believe that an old geezer of
>>>>> 80 can understand the technology when they frequently struggle with it.
>>>>> I like to score the odd point for the old folk when I can <grin>
>>>
>>> Hrm.  The youngsters need to be reminded that their grandparents
>>> INVENTED computers.
>>>
>>>> Heh. You have convinced me :-D
>>>
>>> Little point in trying to educate the stupid
>>
>> Not you, the youngsters!
> 
>    But, for most of us, he (Carlos) *is* a youngster! :-)

{chuckle} :-)

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

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

#140808

Do you really want to give your very expensive smartphone to a table
jockey that doesn't tote around an NFC reader, but has to walk to a
terminal to register the transaction?  When a waiter comes to my table
for me to pay my tab, he has no means of using my phone at the table.
Many restaurants do not have a front desk where you pay for your meal.
You're expected to pay before you leave the table.  The waiters use
terminals to enter the transaction, not hand-held readers.

I'd much prefer handing over a plastic card to a waiter who takes it to
a terminal to enter the transaction than hand them my phone with the
mobile pay app prepared to perform a transaction when the waiter gets it
back to the terminal.  I rarely put my phone into the hands of others,
and even then with great hesitation.  Getting a replacement card is
free.  Replacing a phone is very expensive.  Yep, there are still plenty
of retailers that have no means of reading your phone when you are not
at their front desk or cash register station, if they have one.

What about the contractor that, say, cuts down a tree, and wants to be
paid?  He has his phone, but can your mobile pay app using NFC connect
to his mobile pay app via NFC on his phone?  I've seen many SOHO folks
that plug in a USB card reader into their phone, and that's how they get
paid by sliding your card through their card reader attached to their
phone.  I've even had contractors that don't even have the USB card
reader.  They have to manually write down the credit card number, CVV,
and expiration date onto an invoice that you sign.  Wave the phone all
over the invoice paper, but it ain't gonna work.

I see mobile pay apps as convenient only when they are so.  That they
exist doesn't mean those apps are the most convenient payment method.
Many users don't leave their phones on in trying to preserve battery
power for when they do want to use their phones.  Oh joy, wait to power
up the phone, hope it has enough power, wait for it to load the OS, wait
to load the mobile pay app, select a payment method, and then wave the
phone near the reader.  Hardly convenient having to wait several minutes
to commit the transaction.

Do the mobile pay apps run as a service?  If not, how long does it take
to load them?  No, not refocus to a backgrounded app, but to load the
app, and then select which card to charge?  Android leaves apps
backgrounded until memory is needed for a newly loaded app whereupon a
backgrounded app gets unloaded.  That means backgrounded apps eventually
get unloaded, and you have to load them again.  If ran as a service, or
as a sticky app, Android will reload the service or sticky app when it
finds the app is not loaded.  Otherwise, it's up to you to reload the
app.  For various reasons, some folks use task killers to eliminate idle
backgrounded apps, but services get restarted or sticky apps reloaded
(and why task killers cause consternation amoung their users not
understanding why a killed app will reappear).

I always have my wallet on me.  It's in my pants pocket when I put on my
pants, or I transfer the wallet and other goodies to a clean pair.  My
phone might be with me, might not.  I too often forget to take my phone
with me.  Also, just because I have the phone doesn't mean it happens to
be fully charged.  I've been out with my phone when it makes the dreaded
"battery low" alert, or I find it auto-powered off when the battery
level got too low.  Phones are nowhere near as reliable as cards.  Go
canoeing and fall over into the water.  Card still works, phone may not.
Drop a card.  It still works, maybe not a phone.  Cards don't need
batteries.  Phones do.  I could tote around a spare battery (if the
phone has a user-serviceable battery) or a power pack, but that adds
more nuisance to carrying a phone.  I can leave a charger in my car, but
I'd have to be near my car, and wait for the phone to charge.  While I
can charge to a card, I don't need to charge a card.

I have both manual tools, and those that are battery powered, like a
hand screwdriver and a cordless power drill.  I use both.  Even when the
powered drill is charged and immediately at hand, sometimes a manual
screwdriver is the better choice.  Take both the phone and card with
you.  Use whichever is most convenient at the time, and whichever will
work at the time.  Sometimes either will work.  Sometimes only one
works.  Sometimes neither will work (shit happens).

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

#140811

In article <1o9got62136hu$.dlg@v.nguard.lh>, V@nguard.LH says...
> 
> Do you really want to give your very expensive smartphone to a table
> jockey that doesn't tote around an NFC reader, but has to walk to a
> terminal to register the transaction?  When a waiter comes to my table
> for me to pay my tab, he has no means of using my phone at the table.
> Many restaurants do not have a front desk where you pay for your meal.
> You're expected to pay before you leave the table.  The waiters use
> terminals to enter the transaction, not hand-held readers.
> 
> I'd much prefer handing over a plastic card to a waiter who takes it to
> a terminal to enter the transaction than hand them my phone with the
> mobile pay app prepared to perform a transaction when the waiter gets it
> back to the terminal.  I rarely put my phone into the hands of others,
> and even then with great hesitation.  Getting a replacement card is
> free.  Replacing a phone is very expensive.  Yep, there are still plenty
> of retailers that have no means of reading your phone when you are not
> at their front desk or cash register station, if they have one.
> 
> What about the contractor that, say, cuts down a tree, and wants to be
> paid?  He has his phone, but can your mobile pay app using NFC connect
> to his mobile pay app via NFC on his phone?  I've seen many SOHO folks
> that plug in a USB card reader into their phone, and that's how they get
> paid by sliding your card through their card reader attached to their
> phone.  I've even had contractors that don't even have the USB card
> reader.  They have to manually write down the credit card number, CVV,
> and expiration date onto an invoice that you sign.  Wave the phone all
> over the invoice paper, but it ain't gonna work.
> 
> I see mobile pay apps as convenient only when they are so.  That they
> exist doesn't mean those apps are the most convenient payment method.
> Many users don't leave their phones on in trying to preserve battery
> power for when they do want to use their phones.  Oh joy, wait to power
> up the phone, hope it has enough power, wait for it to load the OS, wait
> to load the mobile pay app, select a payment method, and then wave the
> phone near the reader.  Hardly convenient having to wait several minutes
> to commit the transaction.
> 
Where in the world are you that waiters don't have hand held card 
scanners.
Do you really allow a waiter to wander out of your site with your 
debit/credit card?

> Do the mobile pay apps run as a service?  If not, how long does it take
> to load them?  No, not refocus to a backgrounded app, but to load the
> app, and then select which card to charge?  Android leaves apps
> backgrounded until memory is needed for a newly loaded app whereupon a
> backgrounded app gets unloaded.  That means backgrounded apps eventually
> get unloaded, and you have to load them again.  If ran as a service, or
> as a sticky app, Android will reload the service or sticky app when it
> finds the app is not loaded.  Otherwise, it's up to you to reload the
> app.  For various reasons, some folks use task killers to eliminate idle
> backgrounded apps, but services get restarted or sticky apps reloaded
> (and why task killers cause consternation amoung their users not
> understanding why a killed app will reappear).
> 



-- 
Jim the Geordie

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

#140814

Jim the Geordie <jim@jimXscott.co.uk> wrote:

> Where in the world are you that waiters don't have hand held card 
> scanners.
> Do you really allow a waiter to wander out of your site with your 
> debit/credit card?

Haven't eaten out much, have you.  The vast majority of restaurants I
visit bring you a padded wallet with the tab sheet inside.  You put your
card in the wallet.  The waiter comes back from there terminal with the
actual bill inside the wallet (2 copies: 1 for restaurant, 1 for your
copy).  The bill has already been registered at their terminal, but you
still need to add a tip, and sign the bill.

I'm talking about restaurants where you're sitting at tables, and a
waiter comes to the table.  Not fast food joints where you walk up to
counter to place an order, and wait until the food shows up in a bag.  I
haven't been to fast food joint in decades.  I got sick afterward.  Even
when traveling, I look for a restaurant than visit some drive-up crap
food joint.  Might as well grab a stale sandwich and past-due milk at
the gas shop when refueling.

Haven't you ever eaten at a non-fast food restaurant, or elsewhere than,
say, a buffet where you grab the food with a cash register is at the end
of the line to total up your picks?  Some restaurants have waiters that
have readers to use your phone, but that is definitely not the norm
here.  In fact, it happens so rarely that I'd be surprised the waiter
had a reader to use with my phone.  I get seated, wait to order, order,
wait for the food, eat the food, the waiter brings over a wallet with
the summary tab when I'm done eating, I put the card in the wallet, they
pickup the wallet to ring up the sale at their terminal, and bring back
the bill for me to add a tip and to sign.

Stop eating crap at the fast food or buffet joints.  Start going to real
restaurants.  Then you'll have experience as to which ones have waiters
with readers, and which have you give them a card.  In my region, the
card is the norm method of payment.  In fact, I could wave my phone all
over in the air, but no one brings a reader to my table.

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

#140815

On 5/4/24 7:54 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> J The bill has already been registered at their terminal, but you
> still need to add a tip, and sign the bill.

I always tip in cash.  It's not MY job to help the IRS.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
    While you can't fool all the people all the time, you can fool
    enough of them most of the time to make the rest impotent.
                                             -- Anonymous Democrat

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

#140820

On 5.5.24 4:35 am, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 5/4/24 7:54 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
>> J The bill has already been registered at their terminal, but you
>> still need to add a tip, and sign the bill.
> 
> I always tip in cash.  It's not MY job to help the IRS.
> 

I'm inclined to use cash for tips too. If you add it to a credit card 
payment it usually ends up in the hands of the owner, not the staff who 
looked after me. However, that is becoming a thing of the past now in 
the UK - more and more places add a hefty service charge to the bill, so 
I certainly don't leave any tips then. I consider this tantamount to 
fraud and won't go back to restaurants that do it - but eventually I'll 
have nowhere left to go if I refuse all service charges. We should 
campaign for the law to change to force all businesses to include ALL 
charges in the prices quoted for their goods and to pay their staff a 
fair amount in the first place.


-- 
Tetbury, Gloucestershire , UK

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

#140823

In article <v17kge$1p9gh$2@dont-email.me>, bob.henson@outlook.com 
says...
> 
> On 5.5.24 4:35 am, The Real Bev wrote:
> > On 5/4/24 7:54 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> >> J The bill has already been registered at their terminal, but you
> >> still need to add a tip, and sign the bill.
> > 
> > I always tip in cash.  It's not MY job to help the IRS.
> > 
> 
> I'm inclined to use cash for tips too. If you add it to a credit card 
> payment it usually ends up in the hands of the owner, not the staff who 
> looked after me. However, that is becoming a thing of the past now in 
> the UK - more and more places add a hefty service charge to the bill, so 
> I certainly don't leave any tips then. I consider this tantamount to 
> fraud and won't go back to restaurants that do it - but eventually I'll 
> have nowhere left to go if I refuse all service charges. We should 
> campaign for the law to change to force all businesses to include ALL 
> charges in the prices quoted for their goods and to pay their staff a 
> fair amount in the first place.

Agreed. I sometimes ask the waiter how their system works i.e. do they 
keep their own tips, share amongst the staff (including kitcen staff) or 
does the owner get it?
If it goes through the card, the provider will receive a percentage if 
the tip.
I'm not sure what century VanguardLH lives in, but taxis, my window 
cleaner and the local ice-cream van all have card resders, but of course 
they all prefer cash.

-- 
Jim the Geordie

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

#140835

On 5/5/24 5:14 AM, Jim the Geordie wrote:
> bob.henson@outlook.com says...
>> On 5.5.24 4:35 am, The Real Bev wrote:
>> > 
>> > I always tip in cash.  It's not MY job to help the IRS.
>> 
>> I'm inclined to use cash for tips too. 
 >
> I'm not sure what century VanguardLH lives in, but taxis, my window
> cleaner and the local ice-cream van all have card resders, but of course
> they all prefer cash.

If you ask a small businessperson "Do you give cash discounts?" the 
answer is generally yes.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
               ...so few snipers, so many politicians...

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

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web