Three industry views on: EPOS systems

Technology is a fundamental part of running a retail business in 2026, but all too often – and, arguably, increasingly – the multiple cogs keeping operations ticking can create friction. Each cog working towards differing priorities, functions not quite fitting individual business needs and poor communication can all too easily lead to frustration for all parties, and ultimately it is the small business – most likely working with constrained resources and limited budget – who suffers the most sizeable impact.

Here are three industry players on the state of Electronic Point of Sale (EPOS) systems.

‘Those building something worth coming back to have stopped putting the till at the centre’

Angus Jackson, co-founder and chief commercial officer at Storekit

EPOS providers built their businesses around a simple idea: put the till at the centre, and everything else orbits it. For a long time, that was the right idea. The POS was where the money moved, where orders lived, where the operation ran. Building an ecosystem around it made sense.

The big shift, the one that changes the whole conversation, is in how operators are buying technology in the first place. The smarter operators are now starting with the guest – what does the experience need to be, what technology touches the guest directly, and working backwards from there.

The POS comes later in that list, chosen for how well it fits into the stack, not as the foundation everything else is built on. The operators who are building something worth coming back to have stopped putting the till at the centre.

‘Technology isn’t a luxury, it’s the backbone that many independent small businesses rely on’

Mark Kacary, owner of The Norfolk Deli

For a small independent business, technology isn’t a luxury – it’s the backbone that many rely on. Whether it is the EPOS system, payment terminals or e-commerce, for many small businesses these technologies are proportionally expensive.

These costs are paid for in daily trade. In our case, that means selling a lot of cheese just to stand still. The problem isn’t just the cost of keeping systems running. It’s the cost of change. When platforms shift or integrations are dropped, the impact is immediate. New hardware may be required; you can guarantee that this will be unbudgeted. Not that many small business employ technology experts, so external experts may be needed, these are all costs many small food and drink retailers simply can’t absorb.

And this is where the issue becomes unacceptable. Expecting a small business to make fundamental operational changes with as little as seven days’ notice is not reasonable. It shows a complete disconnect from how independents actually operate. Most small businesses aren’t technical. They rely on providers not just for functionality, but for reliability and foresight. That means clear communication, transparency, and a roadmap of what’s coming and when. Because without that, to try and enforce change isn’t progress. It’s disruption. And disruption at this level doesn’t just cost money. It costs trust.

‘Some argue that future frameworks need to better reflect real-world trading impact’

Jacob Strauss, CTO of ChaseLabs

There is ongoing discussion within the industry about improving consistency and predictability around platform change management, particularly as EPOS systems become more central to day-to-day operations. Some commonly proposed improvements include clearer API versioning practices, longer notice periods for non-security-related breaking changes, and more consistent support windows for older integrations.

Data portability is another area of focus. Merchants increasingly expect to be able to export operational data in structured formats that cover not only sales figures, but also product information, tax settings, staff records, audit logs and customer data. In practice, the scope and format of available exports depends on the platform.

Offline capability is also an important design consideration. Many systems provide some form of offline or fallback mode, but the level of functionality available without connectivity varies. As a result, resilience during outages depends on both system design and operational preparedness.

In terms of service expectations, most SLAs focus on system uptime and availability rather than specific business outcomes such as completing individual transactions. Some stakeholders argue that future service frameworks may need to better reflect real-world trading impact, but this is not yet an industry standard.