Apple Plans To Add Satellite Features To iPhones for Emergencies (bloomberg.com) 57
Apple's push to bring satellite capabilities to the iPhone will be focused on emergency situations, allowing users to send texts to first responders and report crashes in areas without cellular coverage. From a report: The company is developing at least two related emergency features that will rely on satellite networks, aiming to release them in future iPhones, according to a person with knowledge of the situation. Apple has been working on satellite technology for years, with a team exploring the concept since at least 2017, Bloomberg has reported. Speculation that the next iPhone will have satellite capabilities ramped up this week after TF International Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said the phone will probably work with spectrum owned by Globalstar. That's led to conjecture that the iPhone will become something akin to a satellite phone, freeing users from having to rely on cell networks. But Apple's plan is initially more limited in scope, according to the person, with the focus on helping customers handle crisis scenarios.
Emergency only and who pays (Score:4, Insightful)
It will be emergency use only due to the high power requirements and very limited bandwidth available on that satellite network.
Presumably Apple is paying them to take the traffic, but the question is how it will be passed on to the consumer. Will it be a subscription or will it be part of the price of the phone?
Would kinda suck if you needed it and realized that your subscription had lapsed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Emergency only and who pays (Score:4, Informative)
$20/meg $10/min voice $2 per text message! (Score:2)
$20/meg $10/min voice $2 per text message!
Re: (Score:2)
The other option is a monthly fee to access a private satellite device network, which adds up to even more.
Re: (Score:2)
Who cares about the per-message costs? A PLB is $300-$400 for a device you will, in all liklihood, never use even once. But I pay it.
The other option is a monthly fee to access a private satellite device network, which adds up to even more.
Some of us can't afford that, and choose to just scream over 121.5MHz (guard), you insensitive clod! /s
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand how you are trying to figure the costs. It seems like substantial additional hardware would be required, and every bit of hardware added to a highly portable device is a big downer. Even worse if the extra hardware is rarely used.
However to me the big cost is the new security vulnerabilities such a capability would introduce. Smartphones already have plenty of capabilities to stomp on our privacy without this. Create the vulnerability and the bad guys will come.
But how about making ECBMs
Re: Emergency only and who pays (Score:2)
Apple devices are already "price padded."
As are all cellphones.
We non-Communists like to call that Padding "Profit". Without it to spur cellphone development, we would all be still communicating between villages with tribal drums and smoke signals.
Upcoming Google and Samsung commercials. (Score:1)
2021: What a stupid "courageous feature"!!!
2022: Check out the sat connectivity in our new phone!
Re: Emergency only and who pays (Score:2)
Re: Emergency only and who pays (Score:2)
isn't just stupid and wrong; it's sociopathic.
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Re: Emergency only and who pays (Score:1)
I don't think..
Enough said.
Pretty sure not a subscription... (Score:1)
Presumably Apple is paying them to take the traffic, but the question is how it will be passed on to the consumer. Will it be a subscription or will it be part of the price of the phone?
This is one thing I don't see as a subscription, especially the reporting a disaster feature.
I do think the user will have to pay somehow for text to emergency contacts using this feature, but I think that's either per-text or maybe, unlocking fro a day for a specific price. So that's kind of like a subscription, but I'm pr
Re: Pretty sure not a subscription... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For $200 a month, you can get unlimited voice calling from Globalstar, with the assumption that people who buy that service are going to use it whether they're in cellular range or not.
So I figure if they require you to have service from a cellular carrier that covers your home address (so that usage occurs only when you're outside of cellular territory), and make this be a fallback-only signal path (don't allow users to disable cellular without disabling satellite), they could probably charge $10 a month
Starlink has a lot of users... (Score:1)
if Apple goes with Starlink as the satellite provider, because they have a ton of capacity and not a lot of users
I don't think Starlink is as devoid of users as you think, for the foreseeable future the number of Starlink users is constrained only by how fast they can produce dishes to hook them up. I'm still waiting for equipment and I'm just mid-latitudes of the U.S. So they may not want to east into service with a cell deal.. also it seems like Elon has maybe a minor grudge against Apple?
Re: (Score:2)
if Apple goes with Starlink as the satellite provider, because they have a ton of capacity and not a lot of users
I don't think Starlink is as devoid of users as you think, for the foreseeable future the number of Starlink users is constrained only by how fast they can produce dishes to hook them up. I'm still waiting for equipment and I'm just mid-latitudes of the U.S. So they may not want to east into service with a cell deal.. also it seems like Elon has maybe a minor grudge against Apple?
Oh, I'm sure they'll get a lot of users in flyover territory where the cheapest cable Internet service costs $100 a month and sucks, or in places where cable doesn't reach. And if and when they release new receivers that aren't tied to a fixed geographical location, Starlink service will also be great for people with campers and motor homes, but that's still in the future.
But otherwise, Starlink is kind of a niche market at $99 a month. For most Americans, it costs way more than cable, and most people don
Re: (Score:3)
Would kinda suck if you needed it and realized that your subscription had lapsed.
It would suck about as much as not having sat comms in the first place. Or having a Spot device but letting the subscription lapse.
My fingers are crossed this will have some pay-on-demand component. The way it sits now I have a $200 Spot device that I have to active for a month at $15 if I go on a week long hike in the back country. It is more limited than my phone, is another device I have to carry and keep track of and make sure is charged. It would be nice to just take my phone and know it could talk
Re: (Score:1)
It will be emergency use only due to the high power requirements and very limited bandwidth available on that satellite network.
Presumably Apple is paying them to take the traffic, but the question is how it will be passed on to the consumer. Will it be a subscription or will it be part of the price of the phone?
Would kinda suck if you needed it and realized that your subscription had lapsed.
Genuinely, if I need the services, I'll happily pay pretty large amounts per incident. At the same time, I cannot imagine a world where sufficient numbers of people will actually pay for this service as a subscription, unless the prices are absurdly low. I'd hope they'll charge on a per-incident basis.
Re: (Score:2)
Would kinda suck if you needed it and realized that your subscription had lapsed.
If this is real (I have doubts) I imagine Apple will just pay the provider a fixed yearly fee to allow for the service. If it's going to work like an emergency beacon, it's going to be a tiny amount of data, even for a sat phone provider. I'm sure "Here's a billion dollars, every year" would cover it.
Re: (Score:1)
In many cases, for true emergencies, the providers will either voluntary or mandatory have some bandwidth for events like this. Kind of like 112 or 911 - you don't have to pay or even have an active subscription for it to work, but it will be the only thing you're allowed to do.
In the US, the government funds a system I believe through both NOAA and NASA. Internationally, there is Cospas-Sarsat and a few others (eg. GALILEO has a feature like that built in). Basically the cost is baked into the cost of your
It's becoming a tri-corder (Score:1)
With Apple Watch, kind of is... (Score:1)
If you think about it the iPhone/Apple Watch combo is kind of a tricorder already, like that little probe McCoy would remove from the box and run over people... you could already use it to get a heart reading and soon (maybe not this year) blood sugar levels on other people if you needed to.
Over time they'll add more and more sensors to it...
Re: (Score:3)
All it's lacking is DeForest Kelly's voice so Siri can declare "He's dead, Jim".
Re: (Score:1)
Re: It's becoming a tri-corder (Score:1)
This makes more sense than the rumors (Score:2)
It's not like Globalstar has the bandwidth to support all of those iPhone users who happen to be wandering in places with lousy cell coverage.
Supporting satellite-based communication on an emergency basis only would require far less in terms of the limited bandwidth available.
Re: (Score:2)
My main question would be who determines it's an emergency? Because if it's up to the end user, it'll be an emergency every time they need to contact their sweetie to tell them some vitally important news. Like, "I'm picking up pizza!" Or "I need pop tarts."
Re: (Score:2)
My main question would be who determines it's an emergency?
It's based on who you call. Unless your sweetie works at a 911 dispatch center, your call isn't going to qualify.
Re: (Score:2)
My main question would be who determines it's an emergency? Because if it's up to the end user, it'll be an emergency every time they need to contact their sweetie to tell them some vitally important news. Like, "I'm picking up pizza!" Or "I need pop tarts."
And there are consequences if you call an emergency line in cases that are not emergencies.
Re: This makes more sense than the rumors (Score:1)
My main question would be who determines it's an emergency?
Holy shit, you really couldn't figure that one out??
Antenna (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
IANAE, but is it possible to have the phone itself be the antenna? Run the satellite signal through the case/frame?
Re:Antenna (Score:4, Informative)
How do apple plan to get around that problem?
The same way phone manufacturers have been getting away with crap antennas for 20 years, rely on a good front end amplifier and low noise receiver, and digital communication protocols that allow for substantial lost information and a poor connection. SMS data over satellite doesn’t need a great connection or great bandwidth or a stable connection for the low data transfer speeds, nor do you need a much larger battery nor worry about the phone getting too hot. It’s not going to make calls or even be close to as reliable as a purpose built device with proper antenna.
Re: (Score:2)
That telephone appears to be designed for satellite voice calls, which require substantially more data bandwidth than is needed for a brief text message. The gain provided by a larger antenna can be traded off for a longer transmit duration, which is not an issue for short messages. SPOT devices also use Globalstar for short data messages and don't have the big antenna seen on the phone referenced by the parent. https://www.findmespot.com/ [findmespot.com]
Globalstar's RF spectrum is just above the GPS band, so it might be p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Globalstar phones such as the GSP-1700 have a mahoosive antenna. How do apple plan to get around that problem?
And satellite emergency beacons do not have a mahoosive antenna which is precisely what Apple is talking about implementing. They won't be making phone calls with it.
Re: (Score:3)
How about unlocking FM reciever. (Score:3)
In an Emergency condition, more than a Satellite communication to send messages, I would like a low Powered FM enabled in America for all Carriers, so I can actually listen to emergency reports even if my battery is low.
Re: (Score:2)
Roll your own crystal FM receiver http://electronbunker.ca/eb/FM... [electronbunker.ca]
Re: (Score:2)
But then, the sat phone market has been monopolized for so long, who knows if it can be modernized to be cheaper like sat internet will soon be.
Re: (Score:2)
Most modern phones still have a USB-C or Thunderbolt port, which can be used as an antenna, also most phones have a metal bit sicking out that in an emergency you could tape a wire to it. The Wi-Fi and Cell has an internal antenna, while you may not be able to get extreamly clear audio. You can often get the message on what is being required.
Re: (Score:2)
iPhones will be able to call the police (Score:2)
from anywhere, as soon as Apple detects child porn on your phone.
What happens in a real emergency? (Score:1)
Misread "report crashes" (Score:2)
Did anyone else misread "report crashes" as a way to file a bug report? I know mobiles are critical and there are occasional bugs, but it seems like most software reports could probably wait until you're back in cell range.
Finally I can fire my killer satellite (Score:2)
from the palm of my hand!
Here come the musty droids (Score:2)
Holding it wrong, fashion sheep, porn scanning, walled garden...
Next, tell us all about Steve Jobs and Xerox Parc!
Battery life (Score:2)
This would only be useable as a burst mode beacon as transmitting to a satellite takes far more power than receiving a signal, and must overcome much greater distances than phone to tower.
My only concern is if this burst mode activates a few times automatically, fails to get through the structure or vehicle it's in, and drains the battery so you can't call 911.
All the better to track you with, my dear! (Score:2)