Satelite "internet"? All I have read about is the ability to send emergency text messages. The author goes on a tirade about how you can't browse Bloomberg with a 256kbps internet. Straw man much?
> As per GlobalStar, they are capable of up to 256kbps (32Kbps). This is with optimal, unobstructed conditions and high power and gain antennas.
For text messages, even 256 bps is more than enough, hell, even 2 bps is usable for that.
> The source of this rumor is from Ming Chi Kuo
Ignores that the linked article from Bloomberg does not rely on Ming Chi Kuo and is much more concrete than just "the modem supports a frequency".
> Globalstar believes that over half their revenue will come from terrestrial spectrum licencing.
...
> The most likely path forward, and the one that Globalstar proclaims themselves, is licensing this spectrum for use on a terrestrial basis
...
> The recent meteoric rise in Globalstar’s stock price is almost entirely unwarranted.
??? If you're claiming that the new frequency in Iphones is for terrestrial use, then that validates Globalstar’s own strategy, so how is it unwarranted?
It’s odd that this article is titled to state that the iphone 13 doesn’t have satellite internet, but the content states that it nevertheless will have some sort of satellite connectivity. Clickbait much?
> The most likely path forward, and the one that Globalstar proclaims themselves, is licensing this spectrum for use on a terrestrial basis.
So no, not clickbait. The conclusion of the article's author is that n53 band support is not for satellite connectivity but for terrestrial connections using that band.
I have no idea if it will make it into the next iPhone, but it's certainly something Apple has been dumping R&D money into for several years.
From 2019:
>Apple Inc. has a secret team working on satellite technology that the iPhone maker could use to beam internet services directly to devices, bypassing wireless networks, according to people familiar with the work.
The Cupertino, California-based iPhone maker has about a dozen engineers from the aerospace, satellite and antenna design industries working on the project with the goal of deploying their results within five years
Gurman has the best sources inside Apple, and he is still saying that emergency satellite communications (as currently sold in tiny devices like the Garmin Inreach Mini) are actively being worked on.
>The rumored satellite features for future iPhones are reserved for emergency uses only, according to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman. A few days ago, a report by well-known analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said the next iPhones will come with support for Low Earth Orbit satellite calls and messages. Gurman’s sources said, however, that Apple isn’t turning its devices into actual satellite phones, at least for now. Instead, the tech giant is reportedly developing at least two emergency-related features relying on satellite networks.
Kuo has the best sources inside Apple's supply chain, but we've seen him get the timeline wrong for components graduating from prototypes to mass production before.
> The most likely path forward, and the one that Globalstar proclaims themselves, is licensing this spectrum for use on a terrestrial basis.
Maybe it will be used for connecting iPhones to wearable devices, as an alternative to Bluetooth? Or maybe Apple is planning on something like Amazon Sidewalk?
Or maybe Apple is planning literally nothing, it just comes bundled as one of the plethora of functions that the Qualcomm chip can do because it's cheaper to make 1 design to do everything than to tape out more designs.
I find it representative of the sorry state of tech 'journalism' that anyone would think that a cell phone in 2021 is capable of satellite internet.
A quick search will show anyone the size of even the smallest Starlink receiver and common sense dictates that current generation phones cannot have any meaningful signal strength connecting to even an LEO satellite.
I agree it wasn’t going to happen, but I understand their confusion. Current satellite phones are the size of regular cellphones. That’s the equivalent of very low bandwidth internet access, but even low bandwidth access can still be really useful. https://www.g-comm.us/iridium-9555-satellite-phone.html
Dropping that to something that fits in an iPhone would be a very significant improvement, but it hardly breaks the laws of physics. Thus https://xkcd.com/2501/
> In 2007, RIM [...] held multiple meetings after the iPhone was launched and accused Apple of lying about the capabilities of the new device. The claims focused on how it was impossible that a device with such a larger touch display could have any usable battery life. [0]
> [...] it couldn’t do what they were demonstrating without an insanely power hungry processor, it must have terrible battery life, etc. Imagine their surprise when they disassembled an iPhone for the first time and found that the phone was battery with a tiny logic board strapped to it. It was ridiculous, it was brilliant. [1]
I agree with you regarding the next iPhone not having satellite internet. But I don't think it represents "the sorry state of tech journalism" or lack of common sense. I can understand why some people would believe Apple is capable of doing the impossible: because they have seen Apple doing the "impossible" before.
The joke's on you; multiple startups are working on satellites that can communicate with unmodified cell phones. It will probably be limited to SMS but it's not literally impossible.
I wonder what the theoretical minimum size would be for an antenna that can maintain a half-decent connection with the current generation of starlink/iridium/et.al. satellites.
Why? Look how fast technology progresses these days and how people have become so used to it. Seemingly impossible technological advances are rarely met with skepticism and disbelief but rather a shrug of the shoulders and a “Huh, guess they figured that out.”
That’s partly why people are so easily scammed by companies like Nikola and Theranos.
Iriduim phones are much smaller (~5x, I guess) than first Motorola mobile phones. They are capable of internet access, likely with first-generation GPRS speeds, and at killer rates.
Whatever. You know most of you and everybody else in the 1st world is gonna order one within 1-3 months of it coming out anyway. Apple's phones are so good.
Fatalist_ma|4 years ago
> As per GlobalStar, they are capable of up to 256kbps (32Kbps). This is with optimal, unobstructed conditions and high power and gain antennas.
For text messages, even 256 bps is more than enough, hell, even 2 bps is usable for that.
> The source of this rumor is from Ming Chi Kuo
Ignores that the linked article from Bloomberg does not rely on Ming Chi Kuo and is much more concrete than just "the modem supports a frequency".
> Globalstar believes that over half their revenue will come from terrestrial spectrum licencing.
...
> The most likely path forward, and the one that Globalstar proclaims themselves, is licensing this spectrum for use on a terrestrial basis
...
> The recent meteoric rise in Globalstar’s stock price is almost entirely unwarranted.
??? If you're claiming that the new frequency in Iphones is for terrestrial use, then that validates Globalstar’s own strategy, so how is it unwarranted?
nynx|4 years ago
umeshunni|4 years ago
1. The iPhone 13 will have a new chip
2. The new chip is capable of additional bands licensed by Globalstar
3. Globalstar happens to be a satellite company.
Media thinks iPhone 13 can talk to satellites, when what it can really talk to is new 5G bands licensed by Globalstar.
Also see https://twitter.com/saschasegan/status/1432156621690576900
Jtsummers|4 years ago
So no, not clickbait. The conclusion of the article's author is that n53 band support is not for satellite connectivity but for terrestrial connections using that band.
detaro|4 years ago
imwillofficial|4 years ago
GeekyBear|4 years ago
From 2019:
>Apple Inc. has a secret team working on satellite technology that the iPhone maker could use to beam internet services directly to devices, bypassing wireless networks, according to people familiar with the work.
The Cupertino, California-based iPhone maker has about a dozen engineers from the aerospace, satellite and antenna design industries working on the project with the goal of deploying their results within five years
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-20/apple-has...
Gurman has the best sources inside Apple, and he is still saying that emergency satellite communications (as currently sold in tiny devices like the Garmin Inreach Mini) are actively being worked on.
>The rumored satellite features for future iPhones are reserved for emergency uses only, according to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman. A few days ago, a report by well-known analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said the next iPhones will come with support for Low Earth Orbit satellite calls and messages. Gurman’s sources said, however, that Apple isn’t turning its devices into actual satellite phones, at least for now. Instead, the tech giant is reportedly developing at least two emergency-related features relying on satellite networks.
https://techcrunch.com/2021/08/31/apples-rumored-iphone-sate...
Kuo has the best sources inside Apple's supply chain, but we've seen him get the timeline wrong for components graduating from prototypes to mass production before.
jasonhansel|4 years ago
Maybe it will be used for connecting iPhones to wearable devices, as an alternative to Bluetooth? Or maybe Apple is planning on something like Amazon Sidewalk?
Traster|4 years ago
umeshunni|4 years ago
A quick search will show anyone the size of even the smallest Starlink receiver and common sense dictates that current generation phones cannot have any meaningful signal strength connecting to even an LEO satellite.
Retric|4 years ago
Dropping that to something that fits in an iPhone would be a very significant improvement, but it hardly breaks the laws of physics. Thus https://xkcd.com/2501/
lanna|4 years ago
> [...] it couldn’t do what they were demonstrating without an insanely power hungry processor, it must have terrible battery life, etc. Imagine their surprise when they disassembled an iPhone for the first time and found that the phone was battery with a tiny logic board strapped to it. It was ridiculous, it was brilliant. [1]
I agree with you regarding the next iPhone not having satellite internet. But I don't think it represents "the sorry state of tech journalism" or lack of common sense. I can understand why some people would believe Apple is capable of doing the impossible: because they have seen Apple doing the "impossible" before.
[0] https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/news/rim-thought-the-2007-ipho...
[1] https://macdailynews.com/2010/12/27/rim_microsoft_were_in_de...
randyrand|4 years ago
https://www.switchbacktravel.com/best-satellite-messengers
wmf|4 years ago
bob1029|4 years ago
xwdv|4 years ago
That’s partly why people are so easily scammed by companies like Nikola and Theranos.
Andrew_nenakhov|4 years ago
Geee|4 years ago
HugoDaniel|4 years ago
amznthrwaway|4 years ago
[deleted]
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]
murat124|4 years ago
decebalus1|4 years ago
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]
randomopining|4 years ago