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
For the moment, let's assume there are 200 million iPhone users in the US. To get at least 10 MBPS download and 1 MBPS upload would require considerable bandwidth and power. A constellation satellites would have to be launched and maintained. Even if the satellites were launched by SpaceX or countries outside of the US like India or China, the costs would run in the hundreds of billions and is fraught with risk.
That would be illegal in China - and Tim Cook has shown he would not go against the Chinese government's wishes
[automerge]1576958444[/automerge]
Haha - right, sure
Apple under Tim Cook obeys whatever countries laws (ref: China). And private enterprise already stores and sells your data to the government (ref: metadata, other subpoenas and "legal process") In fact they don't even have the 4th amendment restrictions in the USA that the FBI has to abide by...
So no - I do not see this as some great saviour for the sheeple.
Last edited:
This is why I love the fact that Apple is richer than any other company. The projects are way more practical than folding a phone or putting a glass cube in front of one of my eyes
I agree that there should be some kind of central registry of satellites (which probably already exists in some shape or form), but the danger of satellites actually colliding is extremely slim, space is pretty big and satellites are very small. Also, regarding ground-based astronomy: It's not actually as grim as you think it is. When you know the orbits of all of these satellites, you can easily cut them out of your exposure and that's that. Sure, it's a complication, but nothing too difficult to implement.
They do, actually.
As a corporation, it's no good having money if you're not doing anything with it; that's just an inefficient use of resources. Sure, that money isn't just sitting in a bank; it's invested in a bazillion different companies and earning staggering amounts of interest. But still - the way to earn the maximum return on that money (and thus maximum return for investors) is to use it to develop products and businesses (which Apple well know; that's the narrative they push to their investors - "don't leave your money in the bank/invest in property/bonds/whatever; buy shares in Apple!"). Their money is way beyond what you'd need for any reasonable safety net; they have to start using it to develop cool stuff that is going to bolster their share price way beyond what it's doing now. That's why they're desperately seeking new markets: from self-driving cars, to AR/VR, to health monitoring, to stuff like this.
At the same time, while Apple do still make desktop computers, they've primarily been a portable device maker for the last 20 years+. As they know from the iPhone and Apple Watch, mobile internet access is revolutionary when brought to devices that didn't have it before, enabling whole new categories of businesses and technology. And once it's there, it quickly becomes the critical feature (this is what underpins Qualcomm's ability to extort device manufacturers). Hell - the MacBook Air is one of Apple's most popular laptops, and it's a device which can't really handle much more than web-browsing. That's fine; that's 80-90% of what people need. Do that really well and customers will be very happy indeed.
All of this is to say - as crazy as this sounds, I can totally see Apple doing this. It would elevate basically every device they make; from the iPhone/iPad/Mac, to the Apple Watch, to AR glasses, to whatever comes after that; to a level that is very difficult to compete with. And they would own every piece of the system, which they would absolutely love.
SpaceX's reusable rockets and the increased competition in the space-launch market have dramatically dropped the price of launching satellites in to orbit. SpaceX's own Starlink satellite internet is estimated to cost about $10 billion for design, research, building and deployment. Even if it's more - let's say $15 or $20 billion - that's... actually pretty reasonable for your own private, global communications infrastructure. And well within what Apple can afford (they make about $45 billion in profit, every year).
On the financial side: if it costs $20 billion to set this up (remember, that's double what SpaceX estimate, so I'm being conservative), and given that SpaceX estimate each of their satellites to have a useful lifetime of 5-7 years (let's say 5, again being conservative), this would need to generate an additional 9% in annual sales to pay for itself. And, of course, if Apple can get it done for cheaper than that, or stretch the satellite's lifetimes (at 7 years, it only needs to generate 6% additional sales), it'll be even more profitable. If this enables them to develop some new kind of device or they sell access to the service directly, they can make that 6-9% in additional sales easily.
TLDR: I don't think this is very far-fetched.
Last edited:
Sarge, maybe you missed the part where I said I was an astronomer...I know this stuff well. The Kessler effect (the technical name for what we're talking about) is a real worry, and a bunch of new satellites all operating in similar orbits makes it more likely that something like this can be set off. The worry is not that two satellites would hit, but that a large enough piece of junk (say, a big bolt) impacts a satellite or old rocket body with enough force to break multiple large pieces off, which then do the same. We can still track this stuff, and satellites do move to avoid it, but dead satellites are just waiting to be hit hard enough to break up. Add tens of thousands of satellites, and things could get interesting...I'm not sure if the density is high enough to set of a real chain reaction, but it could kill a lot of satellites.
And, I know exactly how grim the satellite networks are for ground based astronomy, as I work on one of the large ground based surveys right now. Large field of view observing can't avoid all the satellites, even now, and anything near twilight runs a real chance of being trashed by a satellite barreling through. Small FOV observing has a better chance of not being ruined, but once there are enough satellites you may be forced to give up on a long exposure (which is sometimes very necessary) to get the science done. There's also the part where "cut them out" requires a bunch of reworking of telescope operations, in hardware, software, or all, because something like a robotic survey can't know where satellites are without reworking the software (I have already pointed out to the field how to do this as I have to do it for AO on a different project), and if you're operating manually you may start early or late and catch the satellite (or the ephemeris may be wrong and do the same). A lot of people are very worried about this, and rightly so, as these networks may easily wipe out a lot of what we do, or cause us complications that require a lot of effort to get around (at a time when science funding is already scarce, and some older telescopes just won't be able to be modified for this).
You're really underselling these things...sure, it may all work out, but it's more likely that we will see major effects to ground based observing, and at some point watch a few satellites get hammered by a debris field.
Well whatever they are doing the fact is they ar spending money doing research which is good for employment and general knowledge gathering. If an exciting new feature comes out of it too then all the better. A lot of R&D doesn’t lead anywhere though just like the car, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t valuable to do it.
Simple question, could you connect only a few iPhones to satellite and share the connection through other iPhones, like p2p connection sharing, but using from Satelite - iPhone - iPhone - iPhone - iPad - iPhone - iMac - iPhone - Macbook - iPhone - etc....?
You could build the entire network like this or not?
You could build the entire network like this or not?
I alway thought that Apple had satellites beaming marketing to customers heads.
Naw... they use tv shows and movies for that.
I'm surprised nothing has been mentioned that this whole idea was one of Steve Job's wishes back in the day. He said it's something he wants to do but technology (at the time) didn't make it possible. Let me see if I can find the article:
www.wired.com
If Apple accomplishes this, they'll do, to cellular carriers, what Amazon is doing to UPS and Fed Ex.
Steve Jobs Wanted iPhone on Its Own Network, Carrier-Free
When Steve Jobs first dreamed up the iPhone with his team at Apple, he didn't want it to run on AT&T's network. He wanted to create his own network.
If Apple accomplishes this, they'll do, to cellular carriers, what Amazon is doing to UPS and Fed Ex.
This.
I stay in the city, Not the type to wander out to nowhere.
but it would bad as heck to have a phone with satellite on it.
Could go sit next to the polar bears At the North Pole and be imessaging if I wanted
[automerge]1577090015[/automerge]
That’d be crazy. Basically you’re just holding a screen and everything you see is coming from outer space. Blows my mind.
Hm... I was thinking about something along the line of this for quite a while for basic communication such as texting, notifications, emergency comm,... , but cell-size would be huge. Even with LEO satellites. Bandwith would barely exist. That would mostly be useful when out in the wild.
In terms of functionality I don't see this going past what Iridium can do today...
Other than that:
www.thuraya.com
www.iridium.com
...just as an example of exisiting tech...
I'd much more appreciate a slot for 4G modules in the Macbooks... And, no, tethering over the phone is not an option. Also, phone plans usually don't have unlimited data. Meanwhile an unlimited data SIM costs 20€ here. It makes a lot more sense to split this up rather than having one SIM with unlimited anything. Imagine you always have to connect to WiFi with you phone for data. Rather inconveniet, right? That's exactly how using a notebook without 4G modem feels like after getting used to this:
In terms of functionality I don't see this going past what Iridium can do today...
Other than that:
SatSleeve for iPhone
The perfect blend of mobility and simplicity, the Thuraya SatSleeve is the smartest, fastest and simplest way to transform your iPhone into a satellite smartphone. An industry first, the Thuraya SatSleeve provides access to phone calls, emails, instant messages and popular social media apps in...
Iridium 9603 Module
The innovative Iridium 9603 module combines the global coverage of the Iridium satellite constellation with the low latency of Iridium Short Burst Data.
www.iridium.com
I'd much more appreciate a slot for 4G modules in the Macbooks... And, no, tethering over the phone is not an option. Also, phone plans usually don't have unlimited data. Meanwhile an unlimited data SIM costs 20€ here. It makes a lot more sense to split this up rather than having one SIM with unlimited anything. Imagine you always have to connect to WiFi with you phone for data. Rather inconveniet, right? That's exactly how using a notebook without 4G modem feels like after getting used to this:
I am surprise that no one could see this as an issue with national (nations) security of a country's sovereignty.
Issues come up with now companies are above national governance? Great ideas and innovation and is probably the future...but it you have enough money, there is no constraint with sending a satellite above the earth that does not have restraints concerning nation(s) sovereignty? This will be very interesting to watch unfold...
It's a nice idea, but particularly in Apple's case is probably doomed to failure. China would almost certainly ban this technology being used in their country, as well as ban anyone from manufacturing it in their country (unless they control it). Until Apple doesn't rely heavily on China for manufacturing and revenue, it's not going to happen. We've already seen how quickly Tim Cook and Apple fold like a cheap suit to avoid displeasing the Chinese government. Other oppressive regimes would have less leverage because they don't have Apple factories, but they could still ban the use and ban the sale of all phones and even all Apple devices in the country if they don't like it.