3 ms·

Considering satellites at that altitude and quantity would be ideal for cell handsets. I would be surprised if Apple wasn't trying to get a piece of this action

Considering satellites at that altitude and quantity would be ideal for cell handsets. I would be surprised if Apple wasn't trying to get a piece of this action as well.

logicallee 12y ago
EDIT: Even if he wanted to, Cook doesn't have enough power at Apple, practically, to be actually in a position to do that yet. I mean clout. He literally can't personally decide to do that (yet) and just do it. The Apple watch is the first category or undertaking of a similar size and novelty, and has yet to be accepted or succeed. (It will.) My comment is being misinterpreted so I've clarified above. My comment isn't about what Apple can 'afford to do' it's about what Tim Cook can 'afford to do' (politically and in terms of consequences.)
- adventured 12y ago
  $150 billion in cash says otherwise. Apple could step in at $1.5 or $2 billion, at twice the valuation, and the deal would be theirs most likely. If not, then for the same price tag, they could just launch their own network.
  - themartorana 12y ago
    I think Musk keeps control pretty tightly held. A Google investment isn't something SpaceX can take without his say-so. So Apple can't randomly drop $2B and win the day - If SpaceX takes the investment, they likely a) leave most control with Musk, and b) are the right partner, the one Musk was looking for.
- threeseed 12y ago
  Tim Cook in case you forgot is the CEO of Apple and has been instrumental in its success. He is also ridiculously well respected within Apple. Not sure what more he could do. That said he isn't stupid enough to invest in something like this. Apple doesn't benefit all that much from having more people on the internet. Google does.
  - fpgeek 12y ago
    Larry Page and Sergey Brin have majority voting control of Google. Tim Cook doesn't have the same at Apple. No matter how well-respected, he's answerable to shareholders in a way Page is not. Arguably we see some of this when Icahn pushes for Apple dividends and share buybacks.
pjy04 12y ago
What frequencies would this be at? Couldn't the govt restrict this frequency like they do today and auction it off?
grayrest 12y ago
Spectrum rights came up in the announcement video for the opening of the Space X satellite branch. The response was that spectrum to satellite is not scarce as long as roof penetration isn't required. Handset to satellite would work against that unless it did some sort of voip satellite/wifi handoff.
- karmicthreat 12y ago
  Yea, looking at the announcement they are talking about something partially optically based. I guess we will see what they can pull off. Optical seems like a difficult choice for anything that moves though.
ohsnap 12y ago
Spectrum that can penetrate walls/homes is very scarce so that won't happen. It appears these sats will be for lasercom and home internet (requiring a dish/antenna).

Considering satellites at that altitude and quantity would be ideal for cell handsets. I would be surprised if Apple wasn't trying to get a piece of this action as well.

logicallee 12y ago

EDIT: Even if he wanted to, Cook doesn't have enough power at Apple, practically, to be actually in a position to do that yet. I mean clout. He literally can't personally decide to do that (yet) and just do it. The Apple watch is the first category or undertaking of a similar size and novelty, and has yet to be accepted or succeed. (It will.) My comment is being misinterpreted so I've clarified above. My comment isn't about what Apple can 'afford to do' it's about what Tim Cook can 'afford to do' (politically and in terms of consequences.)

adventured 12y ago
$150 billion in cash says otherwise. Apple could step in at $1.5 or $2 billion, at twice the valuation, and the deal would be theirs most likely. If not, then for the same price tag, they could just launch their own network.
- themartorana 12y ago
  I think Musk keeps control pretty tightly held. A Google investment isn't something SpaceX can take without his say-so. So Apple can't randomly drop $2B and win the day - If SpaceX takes the investment, they likely a) leave most control with Musk, and b) are the right partner, the one Musk was looking for.
threeseed 12y ago
Tim Cook in case you forgot is the CEO of Apple and has been instrumental in its success. He is also ridiculously well respected within Apple. Not sure what more he could do. That said he isn't stupid enough to invest in something like this. Apple doesn't benefit all that much from having more people on the internet. Google does.
- fpgeek 12y ago
  Larry Page and Sergey Brin have majority voting control of Google. Tim Cook doesn't have the same at Apple. No matter how well-respected, he's answerable to shareholders in a way Page is not. Arguably we see some of this when Icahn pushes for Apple dividends and share buybacks.

pjy04 12y ago

What frequencies would this be at? Couldn't the govt restrict this frequency like they do today and auction it off?

grayrest 12y ago

Spectrum rights came up in the announcement video for the opening of the Space X satellite branch. The response was that spectrum to satellite is not scarce as long as roof penetration isn't required. Handset to satellite would work against that unless it did some sort of voip satellite/wifi handoff.

karmicthreat 12y ago
Yea, looking at the announcement they are talking about something partially optically based. I guess we will see what they can pull off. Optical seems like a difficult choice for anything that moves though.

ohsnap 12y ago

Spectrum that can penetrate walls/homes is very scarce so that won't happen. It appears these sats will be for lasercom and home internet (requiring a dish/antenna).