> possibly because transactions are so much slower (usually 30-60 seconds)
I don't know the details of the technological differences in transaction communication between the two, but in the UK chip and pin is noticeably and consistently faster to perform transactions in my experience, often to the the point that it's perceptibly instant... although it has been quite some years since i've used magnetic ones so that's from memory.
I suppose one way to protect yourself if you are never going to use your card in the US, is by destroying the magnetic strip (magnetically).
The slow reads are entirely a technical failure by some of the large vendors. Some systems are as fast as you describe and most of the ones which I see being that slow are much faster for NFC, so I’m pretty sure it’s just that they were rushed into profuction to meet the deadline imposed by the card vendors.
* many places moved from offline magstripe authorisation to online chip-and-pin authorisation (while still often using card terminals that use dialup connections, and connect per transaction)
* many US banks have really slow authorisation servers (for whatever reasons!); I remember some sales staff being really surprised at my card going through in about a second (and that verification probably involved a network roundtrip to the UK!)
Maybe it's just a difference in how relatively new the technology is to US retailers then, UK shops have had plenty of time to work out the kinks and learn what hardware to avoid.
The first generation of Chip&Pin in the UK were garbage too. Slow and often failed to read the chip, resulting in awkwardly cleaning the chip contacts.
Most of the machines were replaced inside of the first year and things have improved substantially since then.
Ahh yes I do remember a few instances of that now... I wonder what the introduction of the magnetic strip was like, looks like that technology arrived in 1969, anyone here experience that transition?
"UK chip and pin is noticeably and consistently faster to perform transactions" is not because chip&pin process is faster, but because the risk of counterfeit cards is lower and the system can be configured to not verify small transactions against the bank, saving a network roundtrip - the terminal just "talks" to the chip, and does the full verification with the bank later in offline mode, without requiring the customer to wait for the outcome. Doing the same with magstripe would be much more risky.
Hmm, are you talking about the £30 limit? because other than having to manually enter a pin it doesn't seem significantly longer... no i haven't timed it, and I'm not saying that you're wrong, just that it still seems to be bellow a perceptibly significant amount of time. Or perhaps I just don't do enough shopping to have a broad enough range of samples.
I get a Monzo notification on my phone whenever I make a payment. I often feel my phone buzz before the machine has even finished and allowed me to take my card back.
I don't think the percieved speed is simply due to offline mode.
I don't know the details of the technological differences in transaction communication between the two, but in the UK chip and pin is noticeably and consistently faster to perform transactions in my experience, often to the the point that it's perceptibly instant... although it has been quite some years since i've used magnetic ones so that's from memory.
I suppose one way to protect yourself if you are never going to use your card in the US, is by destroying the magnetic strip (magnetically).