The real issue is not smartphones, iOS and Android or apps. The issue is that independent technical standards are intentionally ignored. There is no reason that I should not be able to set my plan through curl and hand-draw the QR code with pen and paper. Sure, I would not want to actually do it like that, that's not the point. The point is: if I can use curl and pen & paper, then I can use whatever else I want. If I want to use a smartphone I should be able to code my own app according to a well-documented public API. Those APIs already do exist, otherwise the official app would not work, so it's no extra work for the service provider.
We need a law that mandates open specifications for access to all publicly available services.
You may not like or disagree with it. But it's the true answer.
Also, having your entire economy depend on companies that are not under your control, and that are even actively being weaponised, that seems like a stupid thing to do.
Also, nothing in all of that precluded a web app.
It'll take a couple of years but people will figure it out eventually.
Overhead handling cash is understandable, but otherwise the point makes no sense.
If you use an app, you probably have an account in some database someplace that holds your contact, billing, and balance information. That account has to be available online for the app on people's smartphones via API calls.
You also need a web portal: if someone loses/breaks their smartphone, and they need to re-install their app, they need to be able to login without the app to perhaps get their credentials again to attach to their app.
That backend has to be able to handle automated monthly payments, as well as manual top-ups via debit, and even cash for those not comfortable with giving payment information:
* https://www.gotransit.com/en/ways-to-pay/many-ways-to-pay-us...
The effort needed to be able to register/handle NFC cards is not much more than having to register/handle the NFC system on smartphone wallets:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_fare_collection
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calypso_(electronic_ticketing_...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIPURSE
In many cases the cards came first and were later addable to various e-wallets:
This has nothing to do with handling cash. It is to do with the elimination of paper tickets for monthly passes. Where I live you can pay cash for one off tickets, but they refuse to sell you paper monthly tickets.
If legal tender is offered as a method of exchange then it should automatically be the best (least expensive).
Frankly, what's happened here is outrageous. By not legislating and outlawing this practice we've another instance of government ineptitude.
Making all the allowances for wheelchairs and the blind costs way more, yet you don't charge them more.
That is even if it were true enough to matter, which it's probably not, and there were no other ways to address it, which there absolutely are.
It's not the real reason but it probably is given as part of the excuse, while the real reason is either simple thoughtlessness, lack of consideration, developers doing whatever is easiest, and/or all the same reasons that cash is being gradually more and more disfavored across the board in all things. You can track and control people sooooo much better without anonymous offline cash.
Probably both. Some people involved are doing it for the first reason, and others are allowing it for the second reason. It's just super convenient synergy for everyone except the consumers.
Really? From TFA:
When comparing the prices of First’s weekly bus pass in my area, which is available to purchase on the bus, and its monthly pass, which is exclusive to its app...
This may be true, but State and Federal law prevail. In California, this [0] looks to be the relevant regulation:
1748.1. (a) No retailer in any sales, service, or lease transaction with a consumer may impose a surcharge on a cardholder who elects to use a credit card in lieu of payment by cash, check, or similar means. A retailer may, however, offer discounts for the purpose of inducing payment by cash, check, or other means not involving the use of a credit card, provided that the discount is offered to all prospective buyers.
[0] <https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-civ/division-3/...> The official place to find this would probably be [1] , but that's super down for me at the moment, so I link to something unofficial.
[1] <https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio...>
https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/finance-and-tax/making...
(Yes, I know UK isn’t in EU anymore but pretty sure their rule is legacy from EU)
Just life frequent insurance accidents, this raises overall costs. May be some other forces too of course
Why shouldn't this (small) cost be mutualised? Why should everything be tuned and customised and priced to every single individual characteristics?
There's also operational cost to handling tons of different situations of people in every practical way of life.
EDIT: my point is that practicality is a clumsy way of disguising the fact that there is a objective, political choice behind it.
Maybe 10 years ago the whole project was stopped, sadly, and now we have the plague that requires everyone including handicapped people and seniors to use (often old and insecure) smartphones.
Are there no passes? e.g. in Budapest I have a monthly public transport pass and I just board the vehicle when it arrives without having to validate or purchase a ticket every time.
Even better, in NRW region some ticket models are only available on the app, nowhere to be found on the ticket machines or at the counter on the stations.
HTLM5 and CSS3 completely remove the need to use a custom app.
All online services should just use a web site, accessible by any browsing device...
It's a political choice whom to inflict operational burden or cost upon.
Less cynically, a good national policy might be to treat all "excess" revenues collected by organizations providing better deals to those passing various wealth/class/fluency tests ("has bank account", "has smart phone", etc.) as "poor taxes". Which are totally legal...but must be accounted for in excruciating detail, and every last farthing turned over to the greedy nitpickers staffing the Poor Tax Dept. of His Majesty's Revenue Authority. Every month, no excuses. So, to avoid that monthly misery for their so-privileged selves, the managers at every org with the paper power to collect poor taxes work hard to make sure that they are not doing so.
Then why did they remove the option that has them "work[ing] at taking your fare" once per month and leave in the one that has them doing that four times per month?
Hell, one can pay cash on the bus itself for a ticket to ride the bus. If cash-handling were the motivation, that'd be the first to go... the author of TFA mentions "First's weekly bus pass" and that they're in Scotland. This leads me to a company called "FirstGroup", which operates "First Bus" and "First Train". First Bus has this to say [0][1] about acquiring tickets on a bus:
With a wide range available, including weekly and monthly tickets, there’s no need to have the right change as you can make your purchase in advance. ... Contactless payments, Apple pay, Google pay and cash are accepted on our buses.
[0] <https://www.firstbus.co.uk/buy-tickets/buy-ticket>
[1] You might note that First Bus says it operates in England and Ireland but makes no mention of Scotland. IDK why that is, but this Scottish tourism website [2] links straight to First Bus's website to answer the question "Where can I find accessible bus and coach travel in Scotland?", so I believe the omission of a mention of Scotland to be an oversight.
[2] <https://www.visitscotland.com/travel-planning/bus-coach>