I have no doubt that businesses don't want to change and invest in new technology, but I have never met an individual credit card user who has professed love for our current credit card system.
With a swipe you can do it while they are still scanning your items, and you can swipe and immediately put it back in your pocket.
With a chip you have to wait till they are done, and you have to wait about 5 to 10 seconds for it to do its thing - then sign it, while the card is still in there (so you can't really keep holding your wallet since you'll need two hands, one to hold the machine, the other for the pen).
Then finally it lets you remove the card. And you have to take out your wallet again and put it back.
Swipe uses exactly zero time, since you do it while you are anyway waiting.
Chip takes about 30 seconds. It adds up. It's also more annoying since you can't just put the card right back in your wallet.
In Russia, POS terminals are connected to cash registers, and only initialize after the items are registered - I think I never ever saw them active prior to the final cost display. Only then you can swipe (or insert) the card. Probably that's just a local specifics, so I'm interested in learning how this works in other countries.
In smaller places typically you have to wait for a total.
Chip and Pin isn’t the same UX/flow as Chip and Sig.
We (US) currently chose the worst of both worlds.
Pin: "something you know" factor. Card owner enters a PIN code on the POS terminal's keypad. The card only allows the transaction after the correct PIN entry, and blocks in case of multiple errors.
No signatures required in this scheme. Except for the cryptographic ones, of course.
It works like this: you insert the card, type in[1] your PIN code that is supposed to be secret and then the purchase is authorized.
Requirement to enter the PIN lessens the fraud possibility in case of lost or stolen cards, and requirement to have the chip combats skimmers (if terminal is capable and card has a chip, swiping the magstripe instead of using the chip should result in rejection).
______
[1] If prompted. Depending on the bank, infrequent low-cost low-risk purchases may not require a PIN code. Card keeps a list of recent purchases in the EEPROM and is probably capable of starting to ask the PIN code after number of purchases is over some threshold (but I'm not exactly sure how they're programmed).
Terretta made it sound like there was a large difference.
With chip+sign, if you lost the card, anyone can use it. They'll just draw something remotely resembling the signature on card (if there's any) and that's it. With chip+PIN, this isn't possible.
I think that's a significant difference.
He made it sound like there was a UI difference especially as regards transaction speed and convenience.
It’ll really hit home in European cafes vs US restaurants.
If I remember correctly, with chip & pin you put in the card, type your pin, then remove your card. With chip & signature you put in your card, wait, after a receipt is printed out (or the screen prompts you) you scribble something that may or may not resemble your name so you can leave.
Personally, I want to use ApplePay/GooglePay but it's slower and more awkward only because I'm not sure if the terminal accepts it. I can get out my wallet and my credit card knowing it'll be accepted. With ApplePay/GooglePay I have to wait, possibly put my wallet away, pull out my phone and pop up the screen.
With a swipe, half the time when I'm done sliding my card through it's already prompting me for my pin. This time difference occurs at self checkouts so I know it has nothing to do with a cashier.
Eventually I figured out using NFC is significantly faster but not everyone has them :(