The video doesn't quite show what is the great features that Hotknot delivers while NFC couldn't. To me, it comes down to the choice between literally touch vs proximity. I prefer the latter that NFC delivers.
On the other hands, BLE is aiming the eWallet market as well. It might be interesting to compare all 3 techologies and rate their pros and cons.
I assume that the advantage is cost, since you can use the touch interface that is already built into the phone. Power should be less too.
I think you'd have to get a lot closer, though, and the data rate is a lot slower.
Still, if it is practically free to add this to a phone, maybe more phones will have it in the future. One of the problems with NFC is that not every phone has it (especially iPhones, which are a significant portion of the market). It is hard to get traction with a 'swipe to pay' NFC system unless lots of people have a device that can be used.
@tb100, I agree. The genius of Hotknot is in the business model. If MTK can leverage its strong presence in touch controller ICs (through Goodix and Mstar), they might be able to proliferate this thing a lot faster -- at least, initially in China.
Junko, I see the potential security aspect of this as being a key differentiator, especially for electronic transaction. Then combined with the cost and design simplicity, Hotknow has potential. The determining factor is adoption by the financial services industry. Thus far, the industry has been heavily divided. If any of the big players see value and adopt Hotknot, it could displace many NFC applications.