Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm chalking this up to the second *ever* story of someone *actually* being saved from imminent peril due to Satellite SOS. I think the first was a car that ran off the road in an area with little traffic, and fell into a ditch where nobody would see it, and the driver was gravely injured. This in a world with billions of iPhones.
 
I'm chalking this up to the second *ever* story of someone *actually* being saved from imminent peril due to Satellite SOS. I think the first was a car that ran off the road in an area with little traffic, and fell into a ditch where nobody would see it, and the driver was gravely injured. This in a world with billions of iPhones.

I have a glass breaker for decades and thankfully never had to use it. I have no plans of getting rid of my glass breaker.
 
Then the government should take the service off their hands and operate it on taxpayer money. Simple. I don’t see why you see this as a gotcha, this is no different than “forcing” AT&T to connect emergency calls on phones with no service while the government handles the rest. Garmin sells plenty of watches and car GPS units, they will live. I don’t think it has ever been right to do this, but it is even worse to do it on an everyday device.
A company offers emergency satellite service which has proved useful, so the government must take it over?

Food is necessary for people to survive. Should the government grow all the food too? How far do we take this?

Should we attack companies who don’t include this service option? Should they be prosecuted?

I dunno, this sense of expectation doesn’t sit right with me.
 
A company offers emergency satellite service which has proved useful, so the government must take it over?

Food is necessary for people to survive. Should the government grow all the food too? How far do we take this?

I mean...


From a telecom perspective:


Yes, if the system proves itself, I would not be surprised if tax money ends up being used to maintain it. Have you ever considered that regardless of whether a cell phone has active service or not, you can use it to call 911 as long as the towers in the area can still communicate with it?
 
A company offers emergency satellite service which has proved useful, so the government must take it over?

Food is necessary for people to survive. Should the government grow all the food too? How far do we take this?

Should we attack companies who don’t include this service option? Should they be prosecuted?

I dunno, this sense of expectation doesn’t sit right with me.
This concern trolling would have more of a bite if 911 didn’t already exist. They would be forced to comply under threat of persistent fine, as the EU does. That being said, I don’t know why they would particularly care if the government is footing the bill anyways. It’s so wild that “people shouldn’t die holding an object that can call for help because they didn’t pay a subscription.” is something anyone is willing to argue for.

Just to add some food for thought, here is the 88 million dollar estimated cost figure placed next to the US national defense budget in 2022.

IMG_0529.jpeg


It’s there... Let me keep zooming in…
IMG_0530.jpeg


Almost there…
IMG_0532.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Ummm...has the EU built out a Satellite Messaging Service that I'm unaware of?
The EU was only mentioned as an example that is in the minds of the public, due to their recent string of tech rulings. They charge fines for non compliance. I don't particularly care what they do, but I imagine they will build out such a service since they actually have their heads screwed on correctly. Any chance you want to interact with the main point of the reply you're quoting from?
 
Apple WILL monetize this, because Apple has to monetize it. They've committed to nearly 1/2 Billion dollars to this service over the next five years.

Here's my best guesss:

Tiered Service:

1. Basic SOS, Free
2. Expanded Satellite messaging, $19.95/month

The expanded service will include unlimited text messaging to individuals over the satellite system. As well as other features that they will reveal.

I don't think it will be that expensive, if they ever offer it. My inReach has unlimited texting for 14.95/month and it's quicker to send texts than having to point your phone in a certain direction and wait for a satellite to fly over.

I've only used the option once, though, and normally just pay for the beacon and emergency services when I'm multi-day backpacking.
 
So Apple still wants to charge money for that service? Imagine the PR disaster, if someone is not rescued, because he did not have a subscription. Emergency calls have traditionally always been free in all networks. Do it would be very unfortunate if the iPhone could technically reach the satellite, but will rather let the iPhone owner die, because he did not buy a subscription. That could even be illegal in the EU.
If you let your house insurance lapse and then, unfortunately, your houre burns down, are you going to blame the insurance company? It's up to the individual to decide their own personal scenario. But this train of thought has definitely seen better days.
 
Here's the funny twist on this conversation...if Apple offered this service for Free, and put other companies out of business, like Garmin, etc...then the same people saying it should be free would be yelling about Apple's anticompetitive behavior ;)
I definitely wouldn’t. I think some people would, but I think this is should be a public service, not a business. I don’t care which company takes the L here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
If you let your house insurance lapse and then, unfortunately, your houre burns down, are you going to blame the insurance company? It's up to the individual to decide their own personal scenario. But this train of thought has definitely seen better days.
Oh god, don't compare this to owners insurance! Compare this to the fire department refusing to come to your house, for whatever reason, while you are trapped inside. Ride this train of thought!
 
I’m mostly indifferent but after reading all the comments about why should people have to pay vs Apple putting out 88M / year for the service… I think people look at it through the same lens they see healthcare - a human right. But healthcare, specifically emergency care, is not free. You ARE entitled to help regardless of your ability to pay, but you get a bill. Perhaps they could bill just like EMS does. Guaranteed help, but billed later. Obviously free is better, and Apple sure makes a ton of money. It would seem that us continuously buying their products would allow this to remain free… but perhaps this is a middle ground. Or bundle it? I don’t know… hard to have an opinion.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: gusmula
I can only speak for Germany. Here you can call the emergency services with any cellphone without even having a SIM card. Phones without a SIM card even display "Only emergency calls".
Same in US. Which is why I encourage people, especially older folks, who want an Apple Watch to get the cellular version even if they don’t plan to subscribe to service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alexandr
Same and I didn't connect its cell service.

Although if you are in the US, I think even without cell service you can still contact emergency services. Not that cell service reception is a replacement for satellite service.
no, you still need to have a celluar signal.. if the towers go down then you dont have a signal.
 
So Apple still wants to charge money for that service? Imagine the PR disaster, if someone is not rescued, because he did not have a subscription. Emergency calls have traditionally always been free in all networks. Do it would be very unfortunate if the iPhone could technically reach the satellite, but will rather let the iPhone owner die, because he did not buy a subscription. That could even be illegal in the EU.
Apple has only stated that the service is free for the first two years. You do realize that the satellite service itself is provided by a third party, don’t you? I’m guessing that Apple is paying them by offering the service for free now. Whatever they charge, it is worth it to save a life.
 
Anyone else notice that it took about 19 minutes for the first message in response from Emergency Services?

(not a criticism of the service...but it shows how much this system still needs to be built out to provide proper service to the hundreds of millions of devices Apple is going to flood into the system.)
Maybe all of the smoke was interfering with transmission?
 
Same and I didn't connect its cell service.

Although if you are in the US, I think even without cell service you can still contact emergency services. Not that cell service reception is a replacement for satellite service.

We can still call 911 without a sim (or esim) activated. But it still requires being in range of a cell tower.
 
The biggest ongoing cost of this has to be running the operations center to receive and relay the messages. Once the satellites are launched they’re not going anywhere and the phone is not maintaining a continuous connection to the satellite… so you only need as much capacity as the number of emergencies you expect. Globestar and Apple ought to be able to work this out and keep the emergency service “free” to the user. I imagine the iPhone 15 will have optional general purpose messaging and voice services available via satellite where they can make a fair amount of money back.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: gusmula
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.