I think you're thinking of the wrong problem. The basic problem, of course, is simply that we want an easy way to pay for things without having to carry a lot of cards around. Google Wallet was an attempt to solve that, but it's got some flaws.
First off, everyone has a card reader, but not everyone accepts the NFC based payment method with Google Wallet from the phone. At the relatively few places that accept it, when I've tried it's been pretty finicky and only worked a few times. So, naturally, I was pretty excited about the idea of a Google Wallet card when I first heard about that because it was a card I could actually swipe. It would be accepted everywhere and not be finicky.
Well, as it turns out that only pulls funds from your Wallet balance, not your selected default payment method. I told several people, even long before the Wallet card, that I really wanted a Google Wallet card that could charge any one of my payment methods, but that had a screen on it so I could select which one to use.
So like I said, it seems like an obvious solution. If you want to have a payment method that works everywhere (including legacy payment systems), isn't finicky, and can replace all of your other cards then you obviously need a card with a barcode that has a screen and a way to select the payment method (or allows you to select the method on your phone before swiping - which is what I'd hoped the Wallet card would do since it's a virtual card).
As for your accusation of protesting based on who is patenting, I really don't give a crap. I'm opposed to most, if not all patents, but especially obvious ones like this because they stifle innovation. They're used for evil SO much more than they're used for good. As for Amazon specifically, I don't really have any major problems with them. I generally like them. I just hope they don't use this patent for evil because that would anger me enough to abandon them.
Comments
I think you're thinking of the wrong problem. The basic problem, of course, is simply that we want an easy way to pay for things without having to carry a lot of cards around. Google Wallet was an attempt to solve that, but it's got some flaws.
First off, everyone has a card reader, but not everyone accepts the NFC based payment method with Google Wallet from the phone. At the relatively few places that accept it, when I've tried it's been pretty finicky and only worked a few times. So, naturally, I was pretty excited about the idea of a Google Wallet card when I first heard about that because it was a card I could actually swipe. It would be accepted everywhere and not be finicky.
Well, as it turns out that only pulls funds from your Wallet balance, not your selected default payment method. I told several people, even long before the Wallet card, that I really wanted a Google Wallet card that could charge any one of my payment methods, but that had a screen on it so I could select which one to use.
So like I said, it seems like an obvious solution. If you want to have a payment method that works everywhere (including legacy payment systems), isn't finicky, and can replace all of your other cards then you obviously need a card with a barcode that has a screen and a way to select the payment method (or allows you to select the method on your phone before swiping - which is what I'd hoped the Wallet card would do since it's a virtual card).
As for your accusation of protesting based on who is patenting, I really don't give a crap. I'm opposed to most, if not all patents, but especially obvious ones like this because they stifle innovation. They're used for evil SO much more than they're used for good. As for Amazon specifically, I don't really have any major problems with them. I generally like them. I just hope they don't use this patent for evil because that would anger me enough to abandon them.