Re: Wallet in Windows 10

Anders,

My suggestion is that we work to "understand what the various camps agree
and disagree about" in defining "digital wallet". I presume you don't
disagree with that! :-)

As for interoperability (i.e. 4.2 in Asbjørn's message), today's W3C media
release announcing the WG quotes Jeff Jaffe saying: "We believe that one
reason for this is that the digital wallet market is fragmented and
providers use incompatible programming interfaces. The proposed standards
from W3C will help ensure interoperability of different solutions by
standardizing the programming interfaces."

Is it correct to say that you don't share Jeff's view on this?

Joseph Potvin
Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
jpotvin@opman.ca
Mobile: 819-593-5983
LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-potvin/2/148/423>

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:47 AM, Anders Rundgren <
anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2015-10-21 10:57, Joseph Potvin wrote:
>
>> Asbjørn,
>>
>> I assume you meant "of course want 4.2 to happen right now" -- even if
>> some interests target 4.1 as the end-game.
>>
>> On the IG list a week and a half ago I suggested that an effort be
>>
> > made towards a framework for "definitions of "digital wallet".
> > 4.2 can be advanced without waiting if we all understand what the
> various camps agree and disagree about.
>
> I guess I disagree with both of you guys :-)
>
> 4.1 [hopefully] won't happen and 4.2 in reality would require a "framework
> implementing/supporting a number of fundamentally different wallets and
> associated payments systems.
>
> I rather expect local payments to become more like web-payments; that is:
> an increasing set of arbitrary payment options.
>
> The only way that *maybe* could change this would be a project supported
> by many different entities that also had the goal of unifying web and local
> payments.
>
> This would surely NOT be an W3C effort since there's no compelling reason
> excluding 99.999% of all potential parties from the party.
>
> Anders Rundgren
>
>
>
>> Joseph Potvin
>> Project Coordinator, DataKinetics
>> Operations Manager | Gestionnaire des opérations
>> The Opman Company | La compagnie Opman
>> jpotvin@opman.ca <mailto:jpotvin@opman.ca>
>> Mobile: 819-593-5983 <tel:819-593-5983>
>> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joseph-potvin/2/148/423>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@ulsberg.no
>> <mailto:asbjorn@ulsberg.no>> wrote:
>>
>>     2015-10-21 7:32 GMT+02:00 Anders Rundgren <
>> anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com <mailto:anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>>:
>>
>>      >
>> http://www.neowin.net/news/joe-belfiore-mobile-payment-support-is-coming-soon-to-windows-10
>>      >
>>      > I must admit that I don't understand how this matches Microsoft's
>> recent
>>      > cross-platform strategy.  One more proprietary wallet is also
>> certainly not
>>      > what banks, merchants, and similar are craving for.
>>
>>     Seems like what must happen is what happens in most emerging markets:
>>
>>     1. Every major platform owner first build their own proprietary
>> solution.
>>     2. They gather some momentum and customers.
>>     3. They notice that momentum stops because of interoperability issues.
>>     4. Given the balance between the different platform owners, what will
>>     happen is either:
>>     4.1. One owner will consumes all others and we'll only have one,
>>     proprietary solution.
>>     4.2. Each owner has equal leverage, so they start figuring out an
>>     interoperable solution.
>>
>>     We of course want 4.1. to happen right now, but the wallet market at
>>     least, I think it's a bit futile.
>>
>>     --
>>     Asbjørn Ulsberg           -=|=- asbjorn@ulsberg.no <mailto:
>> asbjorn@ulsberg.no>
>>     «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
>>
>>
>>
>