Cringley Predicts Apple is About to Create a Satellite-Based IoT Business (cringely.com) 48
Last summer Chinese market analyst Ming-Chi Kuo reported the iPhone 13 would include satellite communication capability, remembers long-time tech pundit Robert Cringley, who adds that the prediction was denied by Apple. "This, in itself, was weird because Apple generally doesn't react to rumors. But beyond the mere reaction, the way Apple responded to Ming's prediction was especially odd."
An unattributed leak from Cupertino said that the iPhone 13 definitely would not include satellite communication capability. And even if some iPhone could communicate with satellites, the leak continued, it wouldn't be offering satellite voice service (which Ming had mentioned), limiting iPhones to satellite text or iMessage.... This was making less and less sense, but it clearly meant there was something happening.
Then came the iPhone 13 launch and Ming was wrong for a change — no satellite communications. So the Cupertino rumor mill went about its business, Ming's satellite rumor apparently forgotten.
But not by me....
And this leads Cringley to another prediction of his own: I am convinced an announcement will be coming soon. Apple will shortly enter the satellite business by acquiring GlobalStar and its 24 satellites. They will use those 24, plus 24 more satellites that Apple has already commissioned, to offer satellite service for iMessage and Apple's Find My network just like they implied in their denial last year.
These apps are 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.
IoT is already a big business that is going to get even bigger even faster because of Apple. Adding that satellite connection to iMessage and Find My offers the possibility of ubiquity for IoT, though only on Apple's network. 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....
While Apple's stated goals will be only iMessage and Find My, followed by IoT, in the longer run Cupertino plans to dis-intermediate the mobile carriers — becoming themselves a satellite-based global phone and data company. That will require shifting over additional Globalstar bandwidth plus launching another 300-600 satellites, so it is several years away but IS coming. Apple will compete not just with every other mobile carrier including Cupertino's own customers, they will also compete with satellite Internet providers like Starlink, OneWeb, and Amazon's Kuiper. Apple can compete with Starlink with so many fewer satellites because GlobalStar has vastly more licensed spectrum than does SpaceX, which has to reuse the same spectrum over and over again with thousands of satellites.
Then came the iPhone 13 launch and Ming was wrong for a change — no satellite communications. So the Cupertino rumor mill went about its business, Ming's satellite rumor apparently forgotten.
But not by me....
And this leads Cringley to another prediction of his own: I am convinced an announcement will be coming soon. Apple will shortly enter the satellite business by acquiring GlobalStar and its 24 satellites. They will use those 24, plus 24 more satellites that Apple has already commissioned, to offer satellite service for iMessage and Apple's Find My network just like they implied in their denial last year.
These apps are 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.
IoT is already a big business that is going to get even bigger even faster because of Apple. Adding that satellite connection to iMessage and Find My offers the possibility of ubiquity for IoT, though only on Apple's network. 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....
While Apple's stated goals will be only iMessage and Find My, followed by IoT, in the longer run Cupertino plans to dis-intermediate the mobile carriers — becoming themselves a satellite-based global phone and data company. That will require shifting over additional Globalstar bandwidth plus launching another 300-600 satellites, so it is several years away but IS coming. Apple will compete not just with every other mobile carrier including Cupertino's own customers, they will also compete with satellite Internet providers like Starlink, OneWeb, and Amazon's Kuiper. Apple can compete with Starlink with so many fewer satellites because GlobalStar has vastly more licensed spectrum than does SpaceX, which has to reuse the same spectrum over and over again with thousands of satellites.
Anti-trust (Score:2)
I like the sound of where Apple is going, but I'm an Android user.
Owning the network itself would be a new level of vertical integration. They don't own the terrestrial networks their phones operate on. Keep competition alive.
Re: (Score:1)
Owning the network itself would be a new level of vertical integration. They don't own the terrestrial networks their phones operate on. Keep competition alive.
If they own the network, how is this competition? They shouldn't (any Telco) own the wires. That should be for the people of the planet, who most like paid for it via Subsidiaries.
This is like saying Car makers should own the road. No they shouldnt, they are not the only traffic, and its just a point of control for whomever does own them.
Cringley is an idiot. (Score:4, Informative)
The people that post as "Robert X. Cringely" are wrong on all their quantifiable claims. Here's the last claim they made about Apple.
After switching to ARM, expect Apple to buy TSMC, too
...
When it comes to semiconductors, then, Apple has two possible moves with the first being designing its own chips. The second possible move, which should be Apple’s big announcement in 2022-23, is buying TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) — the outfit that actually builds those ARM chips. TSMC also happens to be the best semiconductor manufacturer on the planet right now and worth whatever Apple has to pay.
Seriously, you didn't have to predict that Apple was designing their own chips based on who they were employing at the time of the announcement. So this whole "they are buying TSMC" is outright stupidity and blatantly wrong.
The idiots identifying at "Robert X. Cringely" have insight no better than your rando internet poster that claims to be an "expert".
Re: (Score:3)
The people that post as "Robert X. Cringely" are wrong on all their quantifiable claims. Here's the last claim they made about Apple.
After switching to ARM, expect Apple to buy TSMC, too ...
When it comes to semiconductors, then, Apple has two possible moves with the first being designing its own chips. The second possible move, which should be Apple’s big announcement in 2022-23, is buying TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) — the outfit that actually builds those ARM chips. TSMC also happens to be the best semiconductor manufacturer on the planet right now and worth whatever Apple has to pay.
Seriously, you didn't have to predict that Apple was designing their own chips based on who they were employing at the time of the announcement. So this whole "they are buying TSMC" is outright stupidity and blatantly wrong.
Well, considering it's still early into 2022-2023 it's hard to say whether hat is right or wrong; and Apple could very well be looking at getting their own fab capability and TSMC is one possible way. I am not sure Apple would do that, even if they account for 255 of TSMC's revenue, since they would also acquire a whole lot of other products for various manufacturers which could cause them problems with regulators. Personally, I think they would build their own plant first or in partnership with TSMC inst
Re:Cringley is an idiot. (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, considering it's still early into 2022-2023 it's hard to say whether hat is right or wrong;
Aside from the massive anti-trust issues that would come with it, Taiwan wouldn't allow the sale of TSMC for national security reasons. The primary issue is that TSMC is both a big reason that Chinia wants to invade (they want that technology) and why China will not invade (standing orders to destroy fabs/machines upon invasion would cause a HUGE global semiconductor disruption). If Apple buys TSMC then they would be easy to buy off to get the technology and thusly invade Taiwan.
The idea that Taiwan would give up such a massive amount of leverage for money is laughable.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, considering it's still early into 2022-2023 it's hard to say whether hat is right or wrong;
Aside from the massive anti-trust issues that would come with it, Taiwan wouldn't allow the sale of TSMC for national security reasons. The primary issue is that TSMC is both a big reason that Chinia wants to invade (they want that technology) and why China will not invade (standing orders to destroy fabs/machines upon invasion would cause a HUGE global semiconductor disruption). If Apple buys TSMC then they would be easy to buy off to get the technology and thusly invade Taiwan.
The idea that Taiwan would give up such a massive amount of leverage for money is laughable.
While I agree with geopolitical reasoning, TSMC is majority foreign owned.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree with geopolitical reasoning, TSMC is majority foreign owned.
That's doesn't change anything because they are located in Taiwan and therefore still directly subject to Taiwanese law. Should it be decided that TSMC HQ will no longer be in Taiwan (and therefore corporate control no longer directly subject to Taiwanese law) then you should expect to see it be deemed a threat to national security and prevented from happening. Hell, I'm pretty sure the same thing would happen if they decided the most advanced fabrication wasn't going to happen at one of it's facilities i
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree with geopolitical reasoning, TSMC is majority foreign owned.
That's doesn't change anything because they are located in Taiwan and therefore still directly subject to Taiwanese law. Should it be decided that TSMC HQ will no longer be in Taiwan (and therefore corporate control no longer directly subject to Taiwanese law) then you should expect to see it be deemed a threat to national security and prevented from happening. Hell, I'm pretty sure the same thing would happen if they decided the most advanced fabrication wasn't going to happen at one of it's facilities in Taiwan.
Considering they’re building a new plant in AZ that will be one of their most advanced that does not seem to be an issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering they’re building a new plant in AZ that will be one of their most advanced that does not seem to be an issue.
It will be a generation behind the current fab tech.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering they’re building a new plant in AZ that will be one of their most advanced that does not seem to be an issue.
It will be a generation behind the current fab tech.
That remains to be seen. Per Reuters TSMC plans for AZ plant: [reuters.com]
Reuters this month reported that the previously disclosed factory could be the first of up to six planned plants at the site. Now, company officials are debating whether the next plant should be a more advanced facility that can make chips with so-called 3-nanometer chipmaking technology compared to the slower, less-efficient 5-nanometer technology used for the first factory.
The more advanced 3-nanometer plant could cost $23 billion to $25 bil
Re: (Score:2)
The primary issue is that TSMC is both a big reason that Chinia wants to invade (they want that technology) and why China will not invade (standing orders to destroy fabs/machines upon invasion would cause a HUGE global semiconductor disruption).
China cannot capture TSMC through invasion because without the support contracts from companies like ASML, the machines at TSMC become worthless junk.
Re: (Score:2)
without the support contracts from companies like ASML, the machines at TSMC become worthless junk.
China already has support contracts with ASML which is why ASML has an office in China. Multinational corporations don't care where the money comes from or who died to get it to them.
Re: (Score:2)
without the support contracts from companies like ASML, the machines at TSMC become worthless junk.
China already has support contracts with ASML which is why ASML has an office in China. Multinational corporations don't care where the money comes from or who died to get it to them.
They do not for TMSC's machines, and not for EUV.
Re: (Score:2)
So long as they keep paying the same contract, they will. Seriously, your faith in a multinational corp to do the right thing is completely misplaced. Good day.
Re: Cringley is an idiot. (Score:2)
Re: Cringley is an idiot. (Score:4, Interesting)
But I do see them able to buy up some small meaningless semiconductor company and transforming that one into their own production facility.
Not a chance. TSMC is using the most cutting edge fabrication technology to makes Apple's chips. I'm not kidding when I say Apple doesn't have enough money to catch up to TSMC because China has spent hundreds of billions trying for catch up since the 1980s.
Re: (Score:3)
While likely true, keep in mind that Apple bought PA Semi and turned into one of the best processor design groups in the world.
Re: (Score:1)
Not only is Cringley an idiot, he is a total fraud.
His name is Mark C Stephens. He claimed his house was burned down and grifted money off of supposedly losing his house. He supposedly lost the house in California during one of the many fires. Before that he perpetrated a fraud called mineserver - after grifting and taking in tens of thousands of dollars and bilking everyone out of their hardware the latest update, mineserver-update-not-dead-yet, was made over 5 years ago. He stole money and failed to deliv
Re: (Score:2)
p>The idiots identifying at "Robert X. Cringely" have insight no better than your rando internet poster that claims to be an "expert".
But we should listen to you? The "non" random clown on the internet?
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't made any predictions, dumbass.
Re: (Score:1)
I haven't made any predictions, dumbass.
NOPE! just generalized assertions, derpshoes!
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect. I made a very specific claim and backed it up with evidence. I'm not sure what your issue is but it has nothing to do with me. Good day.
Re: (Score:1)
Incorrect. I made a very specific claim and backed it up with evidence./p>
You stated your own observation "as fact" and think it is. YOU are a moron.
Re:Cringley is an idiot. (Score:4, Informative)
In 1987, Mark Stephens was hired by Infoworld magazine where he began writing under the name Robert X. Cringely. When he left Infoworld in 1995, Stephens continued using the Cringely name and Infoworld sued him. They eventually reached an agreement where he was allowed to continue using the Cringely name as long as he wasn't working for a competitor of Infoworld.
For several years now Mark Stephens has claimed that he is "the original Robert X. Cringely". But he isn't. Before he was hired by Infoworld there were at least two other people there who wrote columns using the Cringely pseudonym.
At various points in his career, he has also claimed that he was employee number 12 at Apple, he helped them move out of Steve Jobs' garage, and he designed the original Mac trash can icon. None of this is true and there is no credible evidence that Mark Stephens ever worked at Apple.
In 2015 Cringely announced "The Mineserver Project" on Kickstarter. These miniature Minecraft servers would be small, inexpensive ARM-based boards, running Linux, slightly more powerful than a Raspberry Pi and selling for $99. The project raised $35,000 and the finished boards were supposed to ship in December 2015. But they didn't.
In December 2015 Cringely posted "All these Mineservers will ship this week. Software is complete and SD cards are being duplicated." A week later, he apologized and announced that the shipment would be delayed a week. A month later, he apologized again and said "425 units burned-in and ready to go. But we can't install the boards and put the lids on until the software is finalized."
What
Two months later (March 2016) came the message "Sorry to have gone so long without an update" and Cringely promised there was just "one final bug" to fix in the software and that they fully expected to ship next week. Another month went by. "No more than two weeks" was the promise. Another month passed. "There remains one final problem."
Its now July 2016, seven months past the originally promised ship date, and Cringely says "We will begin shipping within hours as all the Mineservers (300 of them) have long been finished and are waiting only for their SD cards."
Wait
On November 10, 2016, Cringely wrote: "We'll finally start shipping the week after Thanksgiving. Thanks for your patience and support." Nothing was shipped, and there were no more updates posted to the Kickstarter project. Ever.
A lot of Kickstarter projects fail. It happens. But for the next two years Cringely repeatedly claimed that the Mineserver boards were "finished and ready to ship" but there was always "one more little thing" that needed to be fixed.
In July 2017 Cringely posted on his blog that he was suddenly blind from cataracts, but he would have his sight restored in ten days, so maybe everyone could stop asking about the Mineserver boards until then. Never mind that nobody has cataract surgery on both eyes at the same time, that's a minor detail.
Three months later, Cringely claimed that his house burned down and all the Mineserver boards were destroyed. Just like the cataracts and his tenure at Apple, there is very little evidence that any of this is actually true.
In May 2018 Cringely wrote that it would be another 16 months before his insurance company paid him for his house that burned down, and that it might not pay for the melted Mineservers at all. Bu
Re: (Score:2)
After switching to ARM, expect Apple to buy TSMC, too
That prediction was premature because to defend TSMC Apple would need its own thermonuclear missiles, and those won't be ready until mid-2023.
Hope not.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We can have a million satellites they won't collide. Even on a 2D plane each satellite (about the size of a car) 200 square miles to itself. If most (not even all) of the satellites are good at maintaining their location and deorbit gracefully at end of life, there's no problem. Do you know how big 200 square miles is and how tiny something the size of car in all that space (just in 2D)?
Where is the profit (Score:2)
Apple charges a profitable amount for all services and product. So where is the profit coming from on satellite? Yes the have the money to buy anything they want. Yes this could increase sales. But it is small market for those who do not have cell service, and my experience that market is android. So yes it could help them compete wit
Re: (Score:1)
Apple does not really do loss leaders or market building sales.
I think the SE II was exactly that.
Re: (Score:2)
But it is small market for those who do not have cell service,
5G is coming. When it arrives and many people find themselves without service a few hundred yards from a cell site, Apple will have a head start on providing the wide area coverage that satellites can supply.
Smart move on their part.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more dependent on the protocol and error correction. IP telephony works great until the error rate starts to go up. If you can tolerate the occasional pop or click in a phone conversation or odd pixel in video, error correction isn't really needed. If you need error correction for a data stream (like TCP/IP), your latency goes to hell fast.
Since 5G is being sold primarily as the next step for Internet connectivity more so than error tolerant stuff like voice, I don't think the telecoms will bother off
A curious hypothesis... (Score:2)
Having substantial marketshare in places they care about is precisely what allows Apple to do the 'find my' and airtag stuff without their own expensive infrastructure: they can safely assume that there will be a fair number of internet connecte
Re: (Score:2)
I think you aren't a certifiable iVisionary like Apple's leadership team. Just imagine their product announcement:
"Last year you could not reliably locate a harbor seal from your mobile device. Now, we are excited to reveal that you will soon be able to locate even an elephant seal -- from ANYWHERE ON THE GLOBE -- thanks to Apple's new iSnoop satellite megaconstellation!"
Longtime coming fix (Score:3)
SteveJobs missed the opportunity to stand-up an Apple network originally, opting to settle with the divorced Bells taking as consolation “Handoffs” to WiFi network VoIP.
This is a hefty challenge and attempt at a correction going forward that Apple can afford to take. I’d like to know new product it inspires rather than shouldering its legacy wares.
Re: Longtime coming fix (Score:1)
Power requirements (Score:2)
I'm genuinely puzzled. Doesn't it take a fairly substantial power requirement to transmit to orbit? An iPhone could do it, I imagine, but not an AirTag, right? At least not very often.
Re: (Score:1)
We are using myriota modems. 20 byte payload multiple times per day. 10 years life from 5Ah LiTh cell.
Re: (Score:2)
Neat. Thanks for the info.
Satellite communication capable cell phone? (Score:2)
Seriously doubt Apple would do that (Score:2)
Elon has to have 20.000 sats up first (Score:2)
Then we can talk.