Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

CurrentC will not fail because of this, they will fail because they use QR codes. An old lady could probably write a check faster than most people can scan a QR code.



I completely agree with this. QR codes are cumbersome and I refuse to allow any app using with QRCs at its core to touch any of my money.


To be fair it works the other way around--the retailer scans your phone with the QR code on the screen. Like Starbucks' app. It's still clumsy, especially compared to Apple Pay, but you don't have to use your camera for anything.


I looked for the picture I saw somewhere on the MCX website, but can't find it, so I'll have go with the same pic but from the MacRumors site: http://www.macrumors.com/2014/10/27/currentc-mobile-payments...

If I'm reading that diagram correctly, not only does the consumer have to scan a code, but the vendor then scans another code. So not one, but two QR code scans. The success is built in!


The TechCrunk article that MacRumors get their info from says: "When it’s time for a user to check out, they request to pay with CurrentC. The consumer then unlocks their phone, opens the CurrentC app, opens the code scanner, and scans the QR code shown on the cashier’s screen. In some case, the reverse may happen where the consumer’s CurrentC app displays a payment code and the cashier scans it."

So sounds like one or the other.


Hmm, okay, I guess it could be just one scan.

But unrelated, the steps you quote: gawd dahyum. I'd rather stand behind the old lady writing a check, as mentioned by another commenter. Thing is, retailers have mostly solved the check-writing problem (but they still can't make Mr. OldSkool fill out everything but the amount before he gets to the front of the line). No more "I need check approval on aisle 3", no more 3 pieces of ID, just scan it and stick it in the drawer. It sounds like there's a strong possibility that they're bringing us back to the time when those behind get to roll their eyes and sigh as we all wait for the person at the front because "oh, gawd, they're using that thing".


> It sounds like there's a strong possibility that they're bringing us back to the time when those behind get to roll their eyes and sigh as we all wait for the person at the front because "oh, gawd, they're using that thing".

Except I doubt you'll ever see anyone actually use CurrentC.


The MCX org can always pivot to some other payment system, that is still not Apple Pay.


Like what?

Sure, they don't have to re-do the backend, but there's still figuring out how to actually effect the transaction between the customer and merchant. They're already talking a 2015 launch date for this, possibly longer (can't find the article, but people involved in the project are shooting to get it done within 2 years). Changing out the front end app and store support hardware/software would just make the thing more likely to fail.


For instance, they could use a proprietary NFC solution. Works just like Apple Pay, just instead of a credit card number, it's a CurrentC account number. Sure it doesn't too well on iPhones, but I bet they could pay Samsung, etc. to include native support in their hardware, and that's a good chunk of the market.


Sure, but that's also adding several years and a huge amount of development time/risk - it's creating a whole new spec, implementing it in both handsets and payment terminals, and deploying those updates. During which time, the non-halfassed standard will be chugging along just fine, increasing marketshare and generally not sucking.

It's technically possible, but one of those things that's deeply unlikely to happen, particularly given the lead that Apple (and, very likely, Android in the near future) and the credit card companies have in rolling out a solution.

EDIT: added a missing word




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: