Apple's Satellite-Based 'Emergency SOS' Prompts Speculation on Future Plans (cringely.com) 34
First, a rumor from the blog Phone Arena. "Not to be outdone by Apple and Huawei, Samsung is planning to incorporate satellite connectivity options in its Galaxy phones as well, hints leakster Ricciolo."
But it's not the first rumor we've heard about phone vendors and satellites. "Cringley Predicts Apple is About to Create a Satellite-Based IoT Business ," read the headline in June. Long-time tech pundit Robert X. Cringely predicted that Apple would first offer some limited satellite-based functionality,
But he'd also called those services "proxies for Apple entering — and then dominating — the Internet of Things (IoT) business. "After all, iPhones will give them 1.6 billion points of presence for AirTag detection even on sailboats in the middle of the ocean — or on the South Pole.... Ubiquity (being able to track anything in near real time anywhere on the planet) signals the maturity of IoT, turning it quickly into a $1 TRILLION business — in this case Apple's $1 TRILLION business." And beyond that, "in the longer run Cupertino plans to dis-intermediate the mobile carriers — becoming themselves a satellite-based global phone and data company [and] they will also compete with satellite Internet providers like Starlink, OneWeb, and Amazon's Kuiper."
So how did Cringely react last week when Apple announced "Emergency SOS" messaging for the iPhone 14 and 14 Plus — via communication satellites — when their users are out of range of a cell signals? He began by wondering if Apple was intentionally downplaying the satellite features: They limited their usage case to emergency SOS texts in the USA and Canada, sorta said it would be just for iPhone 14s, and be free for only the first two years. They showed a satellite app and very deliberately tried to make it look difficult to use. They gave no technical details and there was no talk of industry partners.
Yet there were hints of what's to come. We (you and I, based on my previous column) already knew, for example, that ANY iPhone can be made to work with Globalstar. We also knew the deal was with Globalstar, which Apple never mentioned but Globalstar confirmed, more or less, later in the day in an SEC filing. But Apple DID mention Find My and Air Tags, notably saying they'd work through the satellites even without having to first beseech the sky with an app. So the app is less than it seems and Apple's satellite network will quickly find its use for the Internet of Things [Cringely predicts]....
Apple very specifically said nothing about the global reach of Find My and Air Tags. There is no reason why those services can't have immediate global satellite support, given that the notification system is entirely within Apple's ecosystem and is not dependent on 911-type public safety agreements.
Maybe it will take a couple years to cover the world with SOS, but not for Find My, which means not for IoT — a business headed fast toward $1 trillion and will therefore [hypothetically] have a near-immediate impact on Apple's bottom line.
Speculating further, Cringely predicts that Globalstar — which has ended up with vast tracts of licensed spectrum — will eventually be purchased by a larger company. ("If not Apple, maybe Elon Musk.")
And this leads Cringely to yet another prediction. "If Elon can't get Globalstar, he and his partners will push for the regulatory expansion into space of terrestrial 5G licenses, which will probably be successful." This will happen, frankly, whether SpaceX and T-Mobile are successful or not, because AST&Science and its investors AT&T, Verizon and Zodafone need 5G in space, too, to compete with Apple. So there WILL eventually be satellite competition for Apple and I think the International Telecommunication Union will eventually succumb to industry pressure.
And by the end Cringely is also speculating about just how Apple will come up with innovative new satellite designs on a faster schedule...
But it's not the first rumor we've heard about phone vendors and satellites. "Cringley Predicts Apple is About to Create a Satellite-Based IoT Business ," read the headline in June. Long-time tech pundit Robert X. Cringely predicted that Apple would first offer some limited satellite-based functionality,
But he'd also called those services "proxies for Apple entering — and then dominating — the Internet of Things (IoT) business. "After all, iPhones will give them 1.6 billion points of presence for AirTag detection even on sailboats in the middle of the ocean — or on the South Pole.... Ubiquity (being able to track anything in near real time anywhere on the planet) signals the maturity of IoT, turning it quickly into a $1 TRILLION business — in this case Apple's $1 TRILLION business." And beyond that, "in the longer run Cupertino plans to dis-intermediate the mobile carriers — becoming themselves a satellite-based global phone and data company [and] they will also compete with satellite Internet providers like Starlink, OneWeb, and Amazon's Kuiper."
So how did Cringely react last week when Apple announced "Emergency SOS" messaging for the iPhone 14 and 14 Plus — via communication satellites — when their users are out of range of a cell signals? He began by wondering if Apple was intentionally downplaying the satellite features: They limited their usage case to emergency SOS texts in the USA and Canada, sorta said it would be just for iPhone 14s, and be free for only the first two years. They showed a satellite app and very deliberately tried to make it look difficult to use. They gave no technical details and there was no talk of industry partners.
Yet there were hints of what's to come. We (you and I, based on my previous column) already knew, for example, that ANY iPhone can be made to work with Globalstar. We also knew the deal was with Globalstar, which Apple never mentioned but Globalstar confirmed, more or less, later in the day in an SEC filing. But Apple DID mention Find My and Air Tags, notably saying they'd work through the satellites even without having to first beseech the sky with an app. So the app is less than it seems and Apple's satellite network will quickly find its use for the Internet of Things [Cringely predicts]....
Apple very specifically said nothing about the global reach of Find My and Air Tags. There is no reason why those services can't have immediate global satellite support, given that the notification system is entirely within Apple's ecosystem and is not dependent on 911-type public safety agreements.
Maybe it will take a couple years to cover the world with SOS, but not for Find My, which means not for IoT — a business headed fast toward $1 trillion and will therefore [hypothetically] have a near-immediate impact on Apple's bottom line.
Speculating further, Cringely predicts that Globalstar — which has ended up with vast tracts of licensed spectrum — will eventually be purchased by a larger company. ("If not Apple, maybe Elon Musk.")
And this leads Cringely to yet another prediction. "If Elon can't get Globalstar, he and his partners will push for the regulatory expansion into space of terrestrial 5G licenses, which will probably be successful." This will happen, frankly, whether SpaceX and T-Mobile are successful or not, because AST&Science and its investors AT&T, Verizon and Zodafone need 5G in space, too, to compete with Apple. So there WILL eventually be satellite competition for Apple and I think the International Telecommunication Union will eventually succumb to industry pressure.
And by the end Cringely is also speculating about just how Apple will come up with innovative new satellite designs on a faster schedule...
Re: They will no doubt be DDos'd (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Solar panel + battery + parabolic dish + directed spectrum noise generator. Throw a camo tarp over it and walk away. /shrug
Strike it if you can find it.
Re: They will no doubt be DDos'd (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The whole point is that it is cheap and throw away. Did you somehow miss that?
Honestly...
Re: They will no doubt be DDos'd (Score:2)
Get out of your basement "MacGeyer", we're living in reality not a TV show.
Can it scale (Score:2)
I loved the idea of putting satellite connectivity but I am wondering whether it can scale. With only 48 satellites, GlobalStart can't handle billions of devices. Maybe in future, GlobalStar will add more satellites. But why didn't they select Starlink which already has thousands of satellites. Also, the Starlink orbits are 4 times closer to earth (200 km vs 800 km). That will also reduce power consumption.
Acquiring Globalstar will be another challenge, specially if others want to use it as well. If anyone
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Starlink and T-Mobile announced a plan to use Starlink satellites as cell towers. Won't require any special phones. Any cell phone should work (even Apple phones).
Of course Starlink has thousands of satellites in LEO so should have good capacity and coverage.
Re: (Score:3)
Its not exactly that simple. The stock Starlink sattilites aren't equipped for this connectivity. It's only specifically designated newer models that will have the very large antennas to hear signals in the 1.9ghz range.
So the effective rnage is more like 3mb spread over an area like 1/2 of Oklahoma.
It'll only ever support very veru low data throughput applications
Re: Can it scale (Score:2)
Yes they will need new satellites but they plan higher data rates once deployed
Re: (Score:2)
Correction, the current Starlink satellites aren't equipped. He's itching to get Starship launched so that he can send up the heavier second-generation Starlinks. Once that happens, they will stop adding more first-generation ones. They are already needed for global coverage because the current ones require a ground station in range. The new ones will be able to use laser links to hop over areas like oceans where they can't build ground stations because there isn't any ground.
And the objective is not to se
Re: Can it scale (Score:2)
Apple just makes a new option (Score:5, Insightful)
Two years later, iPhones and competition Mobile devices were available on other networks,
This is a good thing. Hate apple or not, this is a useful evolution for mobile devices.
We all win.
When can we stop selling spectrum monopolies? (Score:2)
Aren't we to the point where digital spread spectrum (DSS) can let many devices share the same channels automatically?
Wouldn't cellular technology work so much better if EVERYONE was using the same frequency ranges? Versus "oh no, I have a Verizon phone so now I don't want to switch to T-mobile or AT&T unless I buy a new phone."
And claw back frequency ranges from people who aren't using them. Heck even from people who are using them, but poorly, like that highway network thing from 20 years ago that n
Re: (Score:3)
Aren't we to the point where digital spread spectrum (DSS) can let many devices share the same channels automatically? Wouldn't cellular technology work so much better if EVERYONE was using the same frequency ranges? Versus "oh no, I have a Verizon phone so now I don't want to switch to T-mobile or AT&T unless I buy a new phone."
You can absolutely use spread-spectrum technologies to let an arbitrary number of devices share a single chunk of spectrum. But each one you add raises the noise floor for all the others. The public has been exposed to this ever since IS-95 (CDMA) phones came onto the market in the mid-1990s, in the form of "CDMA cell breathing" - where a CDMA base station would experience an effectively reduced coverage footprint during heavy usage hours, because the noise floor from so many devices in the same channels wo
Re: (Score:2)
No, we should sell spectrum but under better stipulations regarding usage. Money shouldn't be the only requirement. As in, the purchaser must utilize the spectrum and also provide quality service to at least a certain number of users.
In the meantime.... (Score:1)
I bought a four pack of Apple AirTags. I've determined that, compared to Tile, they suck. A lot. I'm going back to Tile.
All speculation. (Score:4, Informative)
What Apple has done is they leveraged their size to negotiate for some satellite time - probably on the Iridium constellation. Then they programmed their modem such that it could transmit and receive on the required frequencies. I am not certain about the antenna but they might have been required to add an additional antenna - but that would be the only hardware support required.
So implementing this feature does not require much in the way of additional hardware costs. It will consist of primarily one time costs -- so contracts / negotiations and software / firmware design costs. It will be a good way for Apple to differentiate their product but nothing like what this analysis is predicting.
This sort of satellite bandwidth is super slow and expensive. We are talking about around 200 bytes per second. This is the cost of it being so small it can be used in a hand held device. I see no possibility of this changing anytime soon. Starlink has come the closest, but you will never connect to that constellation using a hand held device. So unless Apple has a breakthrough new technology and the ability to launch thousands of satellites - this guy is talking crap.
Re: (Score:2)
probably on the Iridium constellation
TFA is literally about the partnership between Apple and Globalstar.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably best to take Apple's word for it though.
Cringely (Score:2)
Is definitely an appropriate pseudonym.
Re: Cringely (Score:1)
Is this the same Cringely id-10-t that keeps poo-pooing IBM?
Cost will be the question (Score:2)
I currently get "IoT" data at 100kb/sec (no voice, no SMS) for $4 per month here, excellent coverage and with a physical SIM for free as well and can be terminated each month. Can Apple match that?
Re: Cost will be the question (Score:2)
Where did you get that from? BTW 100kbit is plenty for even wideband voice audio. G.722 for example only needs 64kbit. If the speed isn't always reliable, g.722 also has 48kbit and 56kbit variants, which are nearly as good. You could also try opus if you can find a SIP provider that supports it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am aware. One customer left a review saying he gave one to his kids for YouTube. Apparently it is just barely enough for the lowest resolution settings. The crappy quality nicely limits his kids use of it.
As to where, sorry, Europe. The US will probably take a few more decades to get something like this.
If Ubiquiti abandons it's terrible management soft (Score:1)
Apple is not downplaying capability (Score:4, Informative)
Compare that with Iridium's network, Constellation of 82 satellites (76 operational, 6 spares), multiple messenger brands supported (Garmin, Zoleo, Somewear, Bivy Stick), and their track record for reliability and amazing dispatch service options. Apple, for once, is offering an actually subpar feature set in this specific offering. I am, to be honest, very surprised.
Re: Apple is not downplaying capability (Score:2)
Re:Apple is not downplaying capability (Score:4, Informative)
GlobalStar promises only about 98% of the coverage of the globe - it's generally missing the poles. And yes, Iridium is far superior to GlobalStar in practically all respects.
However, Iridium is HORRENDOUSLY expensive by comparison. SPOT (before it was acquired), Garmin and many other satellite communicators all use GlobalStar because of the low cost nature of it - the hardware is cheap and easy to implement, and the plans are quite affordable.
So yes, GlobalStar's coverage is subpar compared to Iridium, and Iridium knows it. You pay to use Iridium, quite heavily in pretty much all aspects. Hardware's expensive, plans are expensive, and they pretty much don't really care about you as a user. Given Iridium is basically funded by the DoD to service all branches and provide satellite communications for the entirety of the US government, commercial users be damned.
GlobalStar has always hurt for customers, without a major customer like the US government, they rely heavily on commercial users. And for the past decade or so, consumers.
Thus, all the consumer level easily obtained satellite hardware uses GlobalStar because they're willing to work with people on it. The SPOT devices are really popular among those who are out of cellular range (e.g., backcountry hikers, aviators). And if you're really just flying around the US, who cares that GlobalStar isn't covering the poles? If you get stuck in a forest in a flyover state, GlobalStar works well enough to have SAR come get you.
It works so well, you can put a SPOT beacon, or other satellite tracker information in your flight plans so SAR and other emergency services can call them for your location if they have to. Even two-way messaging if needed.
The plans themselves are cheap - I think they range for $10/momth for a basic tracking package where it can ping once every 5 minutes, to $50/month for a minute-by-minute ping, and around $100/month if you need it pinging every 10-30 seconds or so. (If you press the "SOS" button the device, it will force an immediate ping as well as minute by minute pings and send an alert to SAR).
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. GlobalStar isn't perfect, but for what you get, it works well enough. I'm sure Apple talked with Iridium but likely got rebuffed. Given the places an Apple user might accidentally need the capability, I'm sure GlobalStar is "good enough". If you are travelling to places where GlobalStar doesn't have coverage, you won't have cellular coverage either so you'd probably be willing to pay for Iridium hardware and plans. Meanwhile, pilots, hikers, and other people are more than happy to use devices like SPOT and other satellite messengers using GlobalStar because it works well enough and are unlikely to ever be in the area where GlobalStar lacks coverage.
Me personally, I would love to use Iridium. And I won an auction on eBay (this was over a decade and a half ago) for used Iridium handset and two-way pager, but unfortunately the seller's vehicle got broken into when he was going to the post office to send it. (So yes, I got refunded the full amount). But that doesn't mean I wouldn't use a SPOT or other device today - because there are plenty of options and the low cost nature of the things mean carrying multiple emergency signalling devices isn't a bad idea. The aircraft has