10 ms·
Apple and SpaceX link up to support Starlink satellite network on iPhones
- Ancalagon 2y agoWow this might be the best update in years
- pixxel 2y agoYes isn’t it wonderful. Coming to all ‘smart’ devices including dumb televisions. Bypassing networks has never been such wow.
- batch12 2y agoDoesn't that risk already exist with existing technology?
- joshstrange 2y agoIt absolutely does and has been talked about for many years. This doesn’t really change anything unless you lived in a place that didn’t get cell signal.
- MR4D 2y agoSeems the 2 biggest trends in phones are satellites and AI. To me at least, everything else is just noise when a new phone comes out.
- wkat4242 2y agoWell AI is a trend in everything right now. And sats for mobile aren't really a big thing. Qualcomm worked on it and killed it, Samsung did for a while and killed it, Bullitt had it and it was a fringe thing before they collapsed. Only Apple really stood by it. And it's really only their moat, they're still not selling subscriptions. Starlink direct to cell is only available on a fraction of sats, even those launched now. They won't be able to launch a full direct to cell fleet until starship comes online due to the added size and weight of the sats. As an android user I still don't have any replacement for my Garmin inreach which is really a pain because Garmin put the prices up considerably. I was hoping to be able to replace it by now. Also, Bullitt's service is kinda a no go for emergencies because it uses a geostationary network so it won't work from valleys with mountains to the south (in the Northern hemisphere that is). Starlink, globalstar (apple) and Iridium (qualcomm, until they killed the deal) don't have this issue being low earth orbit. I guess the emergency service isn't the big selling point everyone thought it was and the capacity isn't there yet for much more than text messaging yet.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 2y agoI also cannot wait for Apple to improve the product because it should force Garmin to actually charge reasonable prices for their service. There is a yearly fee just to keep the subscription "active" and then you pay for service on a rolling month basis. The extortionate per-message fees are reminiscent of early SMS days in the States. The product and service itself is pretty reliable though. I've taken my Inreach in all sorts of places and had only rare issues with it.
- wkat4242 2y ago> There is a yearly fee just to keep the subscription "active" and then you pay for service on a rolling month basis. This is changing soon. They will now charge a keepalive fee per month. Previously you could pay 40 per year and just activate it for the months you needed it (the freedom plans). Those are gone unfortunately. For an irregular user it now goes from 40 to 120$ per year to keep it active. And yeah I wish there was a bit more competition here. Right now inreach is still the best for me even compared to PLBs though. Because inreach can do 10-minute breadcrumbs. So even when you have a bad fall the homefront can see where you were last. A PLB requires the user to be conscious to turn it on and unfold the antenna. And Apple's solution requires aiming at the satellite.
- dillondoyle 2y agoFor backcountry I would love to have another option (and able to stream video and games lol). But I wouldn't drop the garmin for life saving reasons. I * might * if my garmin watch was able to use the garmin sos. Phone + very long lasting / hard to break watch might be enough for 90% of my nights out for me.
- ofcrpls 2y agohttps://www.verizon.com/about/news/verizon-skylo-launch-direct-device-messaging-customers https://www.verizon.com/about/news/verizon-skylo-launch-dire... The support is standards based and while they are all wetting their feet with a preferred partner, with minimal messaging support focused on emergency use cases, there is enough traction to flush out major use cases across all carriers, with out of the box enablement at the mobile platform layer integrated on supported newer devices with the requisite radio HW.
- JKCalhoun 2y agoAnd it was the cameras for the first 10 years or so.
- ulfw 2y agoSatellite limited to one country is useless for all of us living in the free world. AI on a phone is... well let's be honest Apple "Intelligence" is an utter gimmick. Sadly there's been zero investment it seems in better user interfaces, settings screens have become a joke, cameras seem to have stagnated
- Ginger-Pickles 2y agohttps://archive.ph/wqnqJ https://archive.ph/wqnqJ
- wkat4242 2y ago> Latest iPhone update poised to work with upcoming service Um well yeah the whole idea of starlink direct to cell is that it works with unmodified mobile phones so this isn't really a suprise. What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar. Which is kinda their moat since all attempts on the Android side have failed (qualcomm had a deal with iridium and killed it within the year before it even launched, and bullitt (CAT/Motorola) which had a deal with Inmarsat went bankrupt. The sat part was spun off but without ongoing hardware releases this will be a dead end.
- imoverclocked 2y ago> What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar Apple also works with competing terrestrial cellular network companies.
- wkat4242 2y agoTrue but terrestrial networks are offering generic service directly to consumers. Apple's deal with globalstar is fully part of apple's offer. I don't think they even mention globalstar. It's also a USP for Apple in the mobile market right now.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> terrestrial networks are offering generic service directly to consumers. Apple's deal with globalstar is fully part of apple's offer Globalstar is entirely abstracted away from the consumer. In that manner, it’s similar to TSMC. (Though far less critical.)
- CharlesW 2y ago> What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar. Generally, Apple abhors single-supplier relationships. Having multiple suppliers reduces risk, improves their negotiation leverage, etc.
- SanjayMehta 2y agoI would not run out to upgrade for “AI,” but I would consider it for satellite.
- CalChris 2y agoiPhone 16 already has satellite SOS.
- GeekyBear 2y agoAlso, regular non-emergency texting (iMessage or SMS) has been enabled for customers in the US and Canada.
- adastra22 2y agoI use it daily. I live in Silicon Valley, but house is in the shadow of a hill, and we get zero reception. If I’m too far from the WiFi router, I’m off grid. Since last year I’ve been able to send and receive iMessage texts when out in the backyard or walking around the property.
- ulfw 2y agoOh yea that's the Silicon Valley I remember from my time there. I lived in Mountain View and at&t 768kbit DSL was the only available internet (Comcast dropped connection so often I had to cancel). Many years ago but still fascinating how bad it was in what one would consider the centre of the internet. Good times...
- arghwhat 2y agoIn all seriousness, have you considered adding an outdoor access point? They reach quite far as you usually have Line of Sight. Trying to get a centrally placed indoor AP to penetrate inner and outer walls is guaranteed to give reception issues. Look at he stuff from Ubiquiti.
- adastra22 2y ago
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- colonial 2y agoSmart move. As a Verizon/Android customer, I'm a little miffed that my carrier is going with ASTS's quasi-vaporware over the proven Starlink constellation - baking support into the OS avoids unhappy customers and loaded *'s next to features.
- ivanjovanovic 2y agoI see you don't understand the technological advantage AST has in comparison with Starlink Direct-To-Cell connection. They are some years ahead in this game. AST is already testing full broadband 5G technology fully integrated into the terrestrial networks without interference with Vodafone and AT&T and will get Verizon beta testing approval very soon. What Starlink D2C currently has is a spotty text service with such a low signal strength that is useless for anything more. That is what they got approval for from FCC because any stronger signal is causing unacceptable interference with the current terrestrial networks and the terrestrial providers didn't agree to allow them more than that. It will take a year or two at least for Starlink to get to provide more than text and that is actually stated as well in the T-Mobile press release about this. Other thing is difference in AST and Starlink architecture which makes Starlink not easy to properly integrate in the terrestrial networks since they have gNodeB modules on the satellite, where AST is integrating with the gNodeB modules on the ground. There are many details that make AST leading in the game of direct-to-cell communication in comparison to other solutions. They just got 1B in cash from investors to expand and speed up deployment of their network, so calling them vaporware might not age well when in couple weeks they start releasing the testing results.
- piltdownman 2y ago> technological advantage AST has in comparison with Starlink Direct-To-Cell Unverified and unverifiable to date. Unacceptable for an ex-SPAC which nearly got delisted from the exchanges when it dropped to $2 a share a few months back. >Other thing is difference in AST and Starlink architecture which makes Starlink not easy to properly integrate in the terrestrial networks since they have gNodeB modules on the satellite, where AST is integrating with the gNodeB modules on the ground. Their bent-pipe architecture is going to have to do a LOT of heavy-lifting to mitigate the impacts of their anti-doppler mechanisms on top of the latency, SNR and jitter. Whole thing hinges on Bluebirds phased-array performance and their ability to handover cells at scale - presuming they've achieved a fraction of what they claim to have achieved using unmodified commercial handsets in real-world environments. Schadenfreude at SpaceXs very understandable FCC interference issues is a bad look considering ASTS are wholly dependent on SpaceX to put their constellation into LEO! >There are many details that make AST leading in the game of direct-to-cell communication in comparison to other solutions. A deSPAC with no major R&D heads of note, headed by an Auteur (Abel Avellan) whose only credence is partnerships with Rakuten/Vodafone leading to board seats. ASTS have missed every single self-imposed roadmap delivery milestone, have had to hit up their ATM, previously lost 80% of their value from NAV, and are propped up pricewise by a small float and a rabid reddit-style fanbase as a holdover from the SPAC days. They've proven absolutely nothing so far, despite many lofty claims to the contrary, and Rakuten has already hit them up with a multi-million dollar fine for what was effectively non-delivery.
- jurip 2y ago[flagged]
- brokencode 2y agoOr maybe they’re doing it because Starlink is by far the best and fastest growing satellite internet network in the world? I dislike Elon Musk as much as the next guy, but right now, SpaceX is really the only game in town for anything space related.
- tsimionescu 2y agoSatellite access is not a requirement though for phones. So one could just take a moral stand and not give money to Musk. It's not like satellite access is some major feature people are clamoring for or that competitors are using to outsell Apple. It's a niche use case, and Apple is basically using its power to advertise for Starlink much more than depending on them.
- aydyn 2y agoHow privileged do you need to be to think that everyone and every place has strong cell phone coverage.
- tsimionescu 2y agoI'm not, and I don't think that. I just know that, a, the entire cell phone market has existed and been massive for decades now without satellite phones; and that, b, SpaceX has very very little satellite-LTE connectivity, and is not adding it very quickly.
- mvanbaak 2y agoever heard of 'innovation'? Just because A existed without B in the past, doesn't mean B is useless.
- mg 2y agoDo I understand it correctly, that the satellite communicates with a ground station and the ground station communicates with the phones? It's not that the phone communicates directly with the satellite, right?
- murderfs 2y agoNo, that would be utterly pointless. It's LTE from the sky: https://www.starlink.com/business/direct-to-cell https://www.starlink.com/business/direct-to-cell
- invalidopcode 2y agoNot pointless, that's the best use of Starlink with phones. Base station backhaul gets the benefits of not having to run fiber + space for a bigger antenna w/ better signal to noise ratio
- jbverschoor 2y agoSo no global xPhone/grok soon
- Cumpiler69 2y agoDogePhone?
- noname120 2y agoWith do they have to partner up with T-Mobile if the iPhones will directly communicate with Starlink satellites? Wouldn't piggybacking off the Wi-Fi call technology be enough and less friction for customers? I don't think it would be unreasonable to require customers to have a really cheap mobile plan with no internet if they want to do calls outside of iMessager/WhatsApp/Messenger/etc.
- ryao 2y agoMy understanding is that the starlink satellites will use T-Mobile’s spectrum to communicate with the cellphones, which requires a partnership.
- withinboredom 2y agoDoesn’t 5G from space cause all kinds of issues with other things? Even if they share terrestrial spectrum, it will be broadcast from the sky. This seems like a stupid idea on so many levels.
- OnACoffeeBreak 2y agoStarlink to T-Mobile is using PCS spectrum (1850 – 1990 MHz) licensed to T-Mobile to provide Directo-to-Cell (DTC) service, not whole 5G spectrum.
- withinboredom 2y agoYeah ... def won't cause any front-end overload to anyone else's towers... or microwave ptp connections ... or international spectrum agreements ... or raise the noise floor for nearby frequencies. It'll be fine. I'm sure.
- lxgr 2y agoWhat issues are you thinking about? It's up to the network operator to efficiently manage their spectrum in a way that does not interfere with other radio users, and mutually between their own base stations. If T-Mobile/Starlink manage to do that, you get additional connectivity in remote areas on your existing devices. If they don't, and their own network quality degrades, you can switch networks; if they degrade other networks' quality (actually, not just as a hypothetical), hopefully the FCC will shut them down.
- kjsingh 2y agoCome on Apple, don't taint yourself with Musk's junk!
- theodric 2y agoThose companies represent the collective effort of thousands of talented people creating novel products. I'm happy to support the engineers. I'd barely be online here without Starlink! Not everyone cares about the political drama associated with companies that some dude has an ownership stake in.
- inemesitaffia 2y agoT-Mobile is the partner
- _1tem 2y agoWhat does this actually mean in practice? Internet service everywhere even when out of range of a cell tower? Does it work indoors?
- grishka 2y agoDefinitely not everywhere. Starlink cares a lot about national borders, neutralizing the one major advantage it has over most other internet access technologies. This just begs me to say "you had one job".
- lupusreal 2y agoStarlink disregards national borders when the US government gives them the greenlight for that, not otherwise. That's why it works in Iran. SpaceX / Starlink are an American company with personnel and property on the ground, they cannot simply defy their host government and do whatever they want, causing diplomatic incidents where they please. That's not realistic.
- duxup 2y agoYeah the list of governments where they defy the local government is mostly VERY isolated (politically) countries. They’re certainly not in the business of simply providing access everywhere based on principles.
- noitpmeder 2y agoI also think their starlink system still needs localized ground base stations -- their network isn't at the point they can do satellite<->satellite communication.
- connicpu 2y agoIt does have satellite<->satellite communication, but the latency is way worse if your traffic has to flow like that, so ideally they're building as many ground stations as they can all over the globe. But laser service is always how cruise ships in the middle of the pacific will get full starlink internet.
- Oarch 2y agoVery soon all my memes will come directly from the edge of space and I think that's nice
- hshshshshsh 2y agoEdge of space is a meme.
- 1oooqooq 2y agoyou mean scamer sms about extending your car warranty will come from space... because that's all this deal is about.
- newsclues 2y agoData Centres in Space, with space based AI creating and sharing memes would be nice.
- lxgr 2y agoOr we can just keep them on Earth and use the delta-v for something more useful.
- ftyhbhyjnjk 2y ago"Go Fuck Yourself" wins against the biggest monopoly.
- gigatexal 2y agoWhy Apple is getting into bed with Elon is beyond me. As a customer with tens of thousands spent at Apple and stocks to boot I don’t like this.
- pjerem 2y agoSame situation, I'm actually thinking about not buying Apple anymore.
- inemesitaffia 2y agoT-Mobile is the partner.
- inemesitaffia 2y agoYou want to go Android where Google is a shareholder of Starlink and also supports this on Samsung phones? Anyway T-Mobile is the partner here, not SpaceX
- GeekyBear 2y agoGoogle and Starlink are direct partners. > Under the partnership, SpaceX will locate Starlink ground stations within Google’s data centre properties. https://theincmagazine.com/google-cloud-has-signed-a-deal-with-spacex-to-connect-its-starlink-internet-connectivity/ https://theincmagazine.com/google-cloud-has-signed-a-deal-wi...
- inemesitaffia 2y agoI know that. Starlink used to run in Google cloud and appeared as Google Fi on speed test websites. But this direct to cell product, the customer is T-Mobile and SpaceX is the seller. T-Mobile has a partnership with Apple. And modifying phones to support these services is part of what is done
- GeekyBear 2y ago
- tchock23 2y agoWill there be a way to disable this?
- zitterbewegung 2y agoDon’t use T-Mobile for now.
- gruez 2y agoDoesn't it use regular cellular frequencies? You might be able to "disable this" by using manual network selection, but if they use the same mcc mnc as tmobile (their partner), it'll be impossible to distinguish.
- giancarlostoro 2y agoIts only intended for emergencies... https://support.apple.com/en-us/101573 https://support.apple.com/en-us/101573 So by all means, if you rather not be able to text someone that you're in the middle of nowhere in danger with otherwise no signal, I don't see why you would disable that. Like its literally for SOS use.
- lxgr 2y agoThat's a different service (Apple's own, Globalstar-based one) than the one TFA and this discussion are about (i.e. Starlink/SpaceX + T-Mobile USA).
- lxgr 2y agoProbably (I've read that there will be a switch in the carrier settings for T-Mobile USA), but also why would you want to? In the end, the Starlink satellites will be just another set of cell towers, just with a slightly unusual velocity and altitude. You already can't e.g. disable using T-Mobile base stations leased by a particular land or infrastructure owner.
- pavon 2y ago> Users in the program have a new toggle switch in their iPhone cellular data settings to manage the satellite feature.
- giancarlostoro 2y agoSo T-Mobile is partnering with Starlink to let people send SMS. This is insanely impressive, you could be in the middle of nowhere, and send an emergency text that otherwise would have gone nowhere.
- stogot 2y agoIs it still only line of site emergencies? Or is it that they solved the line of site issue?
- voxic11 2y agoIt works indoors and under tree cover if that is what you are asking. > “Among other results, the satellites have been able to communicate with multiple models of unmodified Samsung, Apple, and Google devices using (T-Mobile’s) PCS G Block spectrum, including in urban and rural areas, indoors and outdoors, and in clear sky and under tree cover” https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-cellular-starlink-system-works-on-iphone-pixel-galaxy-devices https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-cellular-starlink-system-w...
- andrewkri 2y ago[dead]
- alp1n3_eth 2y agoGarmin's smartwatch line and SOS communicators now have a massive target on their back. Now that the satellite availability issues are going to be solved, they just need to push battery life further for the watches and they'll be golden. There will be no point other than simplicity / physical buttons to get a Garmin watch over an Apple watch if you have an iPhone pretty soon. Garmin w/ eink screen, not great app, bad Apple compatibility = $300, latest AW series 10 = $380
- lxgr 2y agoIf you don’t care at all about battery life and, as you say, have an iPhone (the majority of smartphone users globally doesn’t, I believe).
- bn-usd-mistake 2y agoGarmin still has training readiness, training status, training plans, suggested event-based workouts and much longer battery life which makes them work better for endurance (hobby) athletes. On the other hand, Garmin UX is horrible and the watch faces are utterly ugly (saying as former Apple Watch owner and now Garmin FR 965)
- jajko 2y agoPopularity of Garmins go way beyond what you try for some reason reduce it to. These are serious sport and adventure watches, apple doesnt really have a comparable product for many folks, ie for me or my wife (who has apple+garmin mix). I personally also prefer wearing round watches than blocky mini phone. Latest garmins, any garmins, with oled displays look much cooler.
- wslh 2y agoI wonder why nobody mentioned its military uses, such as operating autonomous vehicles.