Those who question the measure maintain that:
- He NFC would allow the trip to be validated more quickly and without connection, reducing lines and boarding times.
- When prioritizing QRexperience depends on open an app, show or scanand of the connectivity of the phone.
- The election would favor platforms with dominant QR ecosystemdisplacing interoperable options wallets and banks.
From the technology sector they point out that the NFC is now available on most smartphones and that its adoption in transportation is usually integrated with contactless cards and virtual credentials, with better performance in peak demand (rush hour, stadiums, events).
For their part, QR defenders argue that:
- It is a most widespread technology between businesses and users, cheap to implement and quick to scale.
- Facilitate at traceability and interoperability between multiple wallets without replacing hardware in validators.
The background discussion: competition and technological neutrality. Specialists claim that the State set open standards (QR and NFC) and equitable access rules so that any wallet or bank can integrate payments in transport no privileges. They also ask performance goals (validation time per passenger, offline availability, security and privacy) to objectively evaluate which technology—or combination—is appropriate at each stage.
What to watch from now on
- If there will be real interoperability between wallets and cards.
- Los validation times in rush hour with QR vs. NFC.
- The transparency in contracts, pilot tests and technical criteria used for the decision.
From Live digital multimedia communication and websites of key cities in Argentina and the world; We disseminate and promote authors and other indistinct means of communication. We also generate our own journalistic creations and investigations for the service of readers.
We suggest reading the source and expanding with the link above to access the origin of the note.
