I’m up 80% this year in my AAPL investment, not including dividends. From an investor viewpoint, I am very happy with Apple’s results right now.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Report: Apple Has 'Secret Team' Working on Satellites to Beam Data Directly to iPhones
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow, great point! In what world would the engineers consider the efficacy of satellite technology for whatever purpose they wish to use it for? How embarassing for them being proven wrong by an armchair analyst who doesn’t even have any knowledge in the field. Kudos to you!
I love the term "beam data," it sounds so cool and high-tech! Perfect for the 2020s! LOL does it use RADIO WAVES to beam this data?! Holy coooowwwww!!!
Apple has a dedicated research team looking into new ways to beam data like internet connectivity directly to iPhones and other devices, reports Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.
They could have also said, "Apple is exploring supporting satellite-based data networks on their mobile devices," but it doesn't have the ring of BEAM DATA FROM SPAAAAACE!!!! LOL it has to make a sound like "Pew pew!" Even better if it can optionally be used to blow stuff up!
yeaah, great.. one server down and your files are gone. I’d rather be in control of my own files. Also, your data can be hacked, you can lose your email adres, and you are dependent on Apple. They could just charge more every year and lock you in their ecosystem So many things can go wrong in the cloud.
no thanks
Satellite internet has a lot of reasons to push it...always connected, permanent GPS, able to call for help anywhere on the globe, avoids shutdowns by authoritarian governments. It would require a big network of satellites to get full coverage, which SpaceX and others are already launching.
I'm an astronomer, and there's a big drawback to these satellite networks, as they drift through all of our ground based science images. Wide field astronomy, which is just taking hold as a major mover of our understanding of the universe, is in danger of being shut down, as there will be a satellite in some or all of the images (and they can ruin the science). There's no regulation, and no one is talking to us about it...and, no, we can't just do this from space, we need ground based telescopes still. There's also the danger of satellite collisions, with so many of them in similar orbits they could easily collide and spread shrapnel that damages other satellites. The movie Gravity is a (really, really bad) example of this (like, really bad, they way overdid what might happen).
There's no regulation of what is going on, big companies run by billionaires are just chucking these things up. It's good for improving our access to space, and the benefits they may provide, but the lack of forethought is disturbing.
I'm an astronomer, and there's a big drawback to these satellite networks, as they drift through all of our ground based science images. Wide field astronomy, which is just taking hold as a major mover of our understanding of the universe, is in danger of being shut down, as there will be a satellite in some or all of the images (and they can ruin the science). There's no regulation, and no one is talking to us about it...and, no, we can't just do this from space, we need ground based telescopes still. There's also the danger of satellite collisions, with so many of them in similar orbits they could easily collide and spread shrapnel that damages other satellites. The movie Gravity is a (really, really bad) example of this (like, really bad, they way overdid what might happen).
There's no regulation of what is going on, big companies run by billionaires are just chucking these things up. It's good for improving our access to space, and the benefits they may provide, but the lack of forethought is disturbing.
I’m pretty sure this is a tiny expenditure relative to autonomous vehicles.
My issue is with the phrasing “beam to”. It makes it sound point to point. It’s still a broadcast...
Maybe this is why they’re putting so much effort into walkie-talkie apps?
Power consumption. Link capacity is a function of signal strength— fibers limit signal loss along the path, but radio always loses strength as 1/r^2.
Isn’t that what we want?
They should work fast.. Starlink already has sattelites floating in space and currently it is reported that U.S. Air Force is testing it already and 5 years from now Starlink will be mature enough and it will be hard to compete with.
But I guess they don't have to compete with Starlink because they will just push this to all Apple devices
But I guess they don't have to compete with Starlink because they will just push this to all Apple devices
Tim has Elon Musk envy. Tim knows that he never created anything like Elon, and wants to be like him.
Tim just rides off people's coat tails. Tim needs to take his dongles and get lost!
Tim just rides off people's coat tails. Tim needs to take his dongles and get lost!
Ideally, by using an array of multiple satellites and coherently adjusting an individual signal's phase transmitted from each satellite in the array, a (*relatively*) narrow RF beam can be formed and steered to a general geographic area. That also works in reverse, receiving signals from handsets on Earth from a specified geographic area. Benefits of narrow beams are frequency reuse and less handset transmit power needed to overcome significant path loss with sufficient SNR (think of kTB) to support a desired signal bandwidth.
That's a short and handwaving summary of how such a system can work. There are many technical issues; ie maintaining an extremely precise ephemeris for each satellite in the array, precision clock/oscillator timing/alignment/adjustment and signal phasing, system coordination, power management and control, etc.
HomePod's beamforming works using similar principles.
Last edited:
I was thinking the same thing at first but that’s for geostationary satellites at ~22,200 miles. It’s not that bad at LEO.
Do you know of any system attempting such a thing? It sounds crazy, but technology evolves quickly so I don’t want to assume it’s impossible...
To build a phased array, you need to control your signal phase to small fractions of a wavelength. HomePod is audio so needs to control phases on the order of milliseconds between speakers that are wired together and in a fixed relationship.
Satellite signals are in the EM in the GHz range. To do what you’re suggesting would require controlling phase between disconnected satellites with timing accuracies of picoseconds and satellite ephemeris controlled to something like a centimeter.
Maybe you could exploit the fact that you’re controlling a set of satellites relative to each other and not relative to a ground station, but even then you‘d be lucky to narrow your beam by much. Every 3dB of gain requires you to double the number of satellites you’re coordinating.
I have a hard time calling it “beaming” if the ground pattern is the size of Spain...
Yup to the above, and no, I'm not aware of any (unless it's what Musk is doing). I was just thinking out loud and speculating what could be possible given the technology available today, and the need to support wide bandwidths from a handset that has a relatively poor antenna and low output power, relatively inexpensive and power constrained compact satellites, and significant path loss. Within timing, ephemeris/positional accuracy, and phase resolution, constraints, I think it's definitely possible. The size of and positional accuracy of the spot, and thus gain, is a function of the number of emitters and limitations/uncertainties of the above.
In the end it boils down to channel bandwidth (ie how much is needed - a lot to meet today's expectations), path loss, low NF receiver channels, available power, and spot size.
It would be a fun problem to work on.
I wouldn't be shocked if Apple were exploring something similar.
Steve’s dodge to avoid license plates on cars would no longer work in California, dealers are required to put temporary plates on the cars before they leave the lot.
Fun indeed!Yup to the above, and no, I'm not aware of any (unless it's what Musk is doing). I was just thinking out loud and speculating what could be possible given the technology available today, and the need to support wide bandwidths from a handset that has a relatively poor antenna and low output power, relatively inexpensive and power constrained compact satellites, and significant path loss. Within timing, ephemeris/positional accuracy, and phase resolution, constraints, I think it's definitely possible. The size of and positional accuracy of the spot, and thus gain, is a function of the number of emitters and limitations/uncertainties of the above.
In the end it boils down to channel bandwidth (ie how much is needed - a lot to meet today's expectations), path loss, low NF receiver channels, available power, and spot size.
It would be a fun problem to work on.
How to run a really successful business for one thing (at least for most of us). It is actually a big advance to only have to deal with one company for your phone. It's also about time Apple leapfrogged the competition again.
lol. For some reason my mind was fixed on Star Wars.
I always thought VOIP would have work on mobile reliability.
This may change all that : https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/2/2...satellite-cell-tower-space-mega-constellation
...but without the big cost to consumer.
Not exactly. Big reason Apple is starting on this is because their competitors are doing the same thing. Facebook, Google, Amazon, Space-X are all looking at deploying satellite internet coverage. Space-X already has.