So, what does the incredibly fantastic all-new Apple™ e-pay system Apple Pay® offer that Google Wallet hasn’t for a couple of years?
Except that it runs on the newest iPhones?
A lot more merchants take it, and merchants now have the equipment to read the signals.
It only runs on the iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus or the Apple Watch (paired with an iPhone). That sounds like a limited customer base.
Not in a year, it won’t be.
Don’t know a whole lot about it yet, but here’s what I thought of so far.
Security
Apple Pay transaction is through tokenization (payment number and unique dynamically generated security code). The merchant doesn’t know your credit card number, just that payment for the amount was authorized. No information about the card, including number, expiration, etc. is transmitted. The card info is stored in the encrypted, firewalled secure enclave they introduced with Touch ID.
Google Wallet transaction is Google paying merchant on your behalf, Google deducting the fee from your account. IOW, Google knows about every single GW transaction.
Trust
Apple has it, Google doesn’t. Hundreds of millions of people have already given Apple financial information for iTunes purchases. Google keeps creeping normal people the fuck out.
Fees
Google collects fees for some transactions. They’re totally in line with the norm for the industry, but they’re there. Apple has made deals with the banks directly, so the transaction costs the customer and merchant nothing.
Note that there are options other than those from Apple or Google. Merchant Customer Exchange, for instance, is a retailer consortium that includes 7-Eleven, Target, Walmart, Sears, Publix, Lowe’s, etc.
So… like all Apple innovations that are polished versions of already-existing things, it’s really, really huge and universal… eventually?
Sleel, good points, thanks, but I detect a little too much “It’s okay when Apple does it but sucky when Google does it.” I’d be inclined to see it that neither middleman is entitled to track purchasing etc. through such a system and I am not convinced Apple is any more hands-off/nose-out than creepy Google.
But there are a lot more Android phones than Apple phones. And the retailer consortium includes many major retailers. Ultimately, I think any solution has to be an open standard, much as credit cards are today.
It’s going to increase the use of both platforms as a measurement of paying now since merchants will have to install NFC readers. Sort of like taking both Visa and MasterCard. I already used the google version soon to be renamed Softwallet and it’s nice not having to carry a pocket full of cards.
Still I thought it strange that Apple unveiled this just weeks after the iCloud security breach that allowed all of those nude celebrity photos to be stolen. Not that I didn’t enjoy that. 
Not really pertinent to the OP, but I think you’re mixing up some products. I haven’t heard of pending changes to the Google Wallet name. Soft Wallet is a an Android app that gives discounts and coupons to users. Isis Wallet is an alternative NFC payment app that was created by Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile, and is available both for Android and iOS. Isis Wallet last week announced they are changing the name to SoftCard to avoid confusion with the terrorist group.
ApplePay will be an open standard that works on iOS. 
The Windows Phone version will follow in a year, followed by an Android version that has half the features and crashes repeatedly.
Been there, done that, a little tired of pome worship…
I’ve read that the cost of the NFC readers is making retailers reluctant to support either the Apple or Google product. That article says that the readers cost $250-300 each. Presumably you need one for each cash register. (But then again, the credit card readers I see in many stores look not-cheap either.)
BTW, what’s “pome worship”?
I think it’s when you really, really like pomegranate-flavored drinks!
Yes, but Android users are not like iPhone users. Despite 80% of smartphones being Android, 80% of spending comes from iPhones. iPhone users are statistically much richer than Android users.
While there are certainly plenty of people who actively choose Android over other OSes, a huge number (a majority?) of people with Android phones have them because Android has captured the bottom of the market and people just choose the cheap or free phone with their service. Those people tend to use their smartphone like it was a feature phone. They don’t visit websites, they don’t buy apps, they don’t embrace new platforms, and they don’t have a lot of money to spend.
So, yes, I think that really the only thing that differentiates Apple Pay from Google Wallet is that the former will come built-in on iPhones. But that’s a huge point, not because things are good when Apple does them and suck when Google does, but because people who spend money on things overwhelmingly buy iPhones. Which group would you want to target your payment platform at?
What that article says is, “Apple users on iPhone and iPad accounted for five times what Google’s Android users did when it comes to online shopping.” But we’re talking about using NFC for in-person shopping, so how much people spend on-line doesn’t matter.
This article has some telling statistics of purchase patterns and demographics that may show why businesses may cater to an Apple pay system when they haven’t shown enthusiasm to get on board with google.
Like most demographic data, it is by definition fraught with generalizations, but the world of marketing, and therefore marketing-driven business decisions, accepts these generalizations everyday.
I can’t find the cite right now, so I’m going off memory, but Starbucks Mobile App is available in both an Apple version, and an Android version. IIRC, the average iPhone user spends 15% on average than the average Android user. That’s a significant number to a retailer.
Do you think all of those online purchasers have forsaken buying things in stores?
Of course not. What’s your point?
My point is that Apple users accounting for five times the online purchasing of Android users might suggest to retailers that there might be a market worth catering to there. Online spending may matter more than your dismissive answer suggests.