Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 496 posts

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#221

Post by fragmede »

dmix wrote: post #188
ericabiz wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn’t looking at this from a technical perspective, more of a business/finance/operations perspective. This is Apple we are talking about. They wouldn’t make this play without some form of vendor lock-in. They will probably choose to lock in based on hardware (“must have iPhone 14 for this capability!”) — but I wouldn’t be surprised to see them lock in on the software side as well. If I were Tim Cook, I might play…

iMessage seems like an odd choice to single out for lock in though. This is a whole network, I doubt it will be integrated directly with services. There’s not any precedent for anyone else doing that (besides maybe Facebook with their phones). Despite the fears about net neutrality.

Apple's a corporation like any other, and they're not above a little bit of vendor lock-in. Plus, given the low data rates this will support, this can only support a limited subset of Internet access.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#222

Post by kelnos »

bottlepalm wrote: post #193
carlivar wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, self driving cars are as hard as expected.

Even in its current state with FSD beta my car drives itself 95% of the time.

I'm not sure what software was present on this random Lyft I took a couple months ago, but I was seated in the front, watching Tesla's infotainment screen the entire ride, which on one side was displaying a sort of wireframe (not the right word, but they weren't realistic drawings) of objects in front of and around the car as we were driving.

I was alarmed to see how often pedestrians, and even cars passing while waiting at a traffic light, would just randomly wink out of existence while still in the car's path, or nearby. Sometimes it would show cars parked at the curb to the sides, and other times nothing, even with our car being the same distance away. And yet somehow at one point it consistently displayed a traffic cone that was on the sidewalk against a building. Didn't really give me much confidence in Tesla's self-driving software if the object detection bits can't even get that right. But again, I don't know what software was running on that car, may not have been the latest-and-greatest.

I don't think I'd trust even the FSD beta to drive my car 95% of the time. Or 1%, even.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#224

Post by trillic »

nonethewiser wrote: post #69
trillic wrote: post #44

Anecdotally, 5G is significantly better at line of sight at significant distances than previous technology. While sailing 40+ miles offshore this summer, I've gotten 5G on deck, with decent upload performance using my iPhone, when in years previous I didn't get coverage much beyond 12 miles anywhere around where I sail, despite there being tall buildings with cell towers on them with a 30+ mile horizon for at least 2…

Do you work from a sailboat?

Nope; just like getting higher resolution weather and being able to update friends/family with ongoings.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#225

Post by AlotOfReading »

samstave wrote: post #183
mlindner wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Thought you could be untrackable off grid? Think again. If you want to be untrackable and off grid why are you bringing your cell phone with you?

The idea is that airplane mode is a farce, and even if you put yourself into airplane, there is still a back-trickle... can anyone disclaim this? What are the anechoics of an airplane mode phone?

They should be identical to the typical spurious emissions standard. Airplane mode is a common way to quickly test spurious emissions before spending tens of thousands on an external lab to certify your device. I'm sure there's some sort of RF magic you could use to get range with 25uW radiated, but it sounds difficult and unnecessary when no one actually uses airplane mode in regular life.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#226

Post by CharlesW »

easton wrote: post #214
CharlesW wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you try to send a SMS, it just won’t go through—-same as it would today. I may be confused about the scenario then, because this does work for me. Specifically, when I turn off my cellular radio (I'm a T-Mobile customer) I can still send and receive messages to people not using iDevices.

Even without Wi-Fi? Because that’s the scenario they’re talking about, where nothing sends because you have no signal whatsoever.

> Because that’s the scenario they’re talking about, where nothing sends because you have no signal whatsoever.

Right, but the point of an iPhone that can talk to satellites that I'll generally always have at least a low-bitrate IP connection? Because with that, I can text iDevice and Android users alike.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#227

Post by ALittleLight »

e-clinton wrote: post #170
ALittleLight wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you damage your own credibility more than Musk's by saying things like this. He's delivered on electric cars and reusable rockets. It's fair to say promises more than he delivers, but he delivers an awful lot.

I agree that he delivers a lot, but the comment is still fair seems he constantly over-promises and under delivers.

If someone said "I'm the fastest man alive! I can run at the speed of sound!" And then they went out and ran at 30% the speed of sound I think it would make sense to say "That was an amazing try. You're not at the speed of sound, or even that close to it, but you're definitely the fastest man alive and that is amazing running." I don't think it would make sense to call this person a fraud.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#228

Post by fragmede »

bhauer wrote: post #163
ericabiz wrote: post #153

I believe this is SpaceX trying to stay one step ahead of Apple. Anyone else remember this strange rumor about iPhones including satellite capability a year ago? https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/29/iphone-13-to-feature-le... Now you have Apple’s event in a couple weeks themed “Far Out” with space pictures. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Apple announced something similar, possibly with Globalstar instead. Of cours…

If you are right, T-Mobile's effort to get Apple onboard with making the necessary changes to separate iMessage payload from regular cell data on these special low-bandwidth space-cells could be a challenge.

Not really. Apple gives T-Mobile the hostnames/IP addresses they use for iMessage, and T-Mobile configures their APN to only allow connections to those addresses. There's a lot that happens on the backend for cell data to work that consumers don't see.

Re: SpaceX, T-Mobile to connect satellites to cellphones in remote areas

#230

Post by macNchz »

xcskier56 wrote: post #78

While I see the great potential in this technology, the collateral damage is the loss of places where one can truly disconnect. I just got back from 4 days camping at a remote mountain lake with zero phone coverage, and it’s one of the most incredible ways to fully recharge and step away from the day to day treadmill of the modern world. When we loose the possibility to completely disconnect, I at least, will feel a…

I agree with you. For me, at least, there’s something to be said about the expectation of being reachable: if you happen to be somewhere remote without any service at all, there’s simply no way for someone to reach you. If you go somewhere everyone knows has service and just turn off your phone, you are perceived to be actively ignoring people.

Others on this thread are discussing the safety aspects, and I don’t disagree that there’s some value there–I like to go out solo in the backcountry, and lead trips with groups of inexperienced people, so I own a satellite phone for that purpose. That said, only a few people have the number for it, everyone else knows that when I’m out there, I’m offline. Even if others had the number, it only sends texts, and very slowly, so it’s not a true connection to the real world, just a lifeline.

I used to feel the same way about getting on a plane. Flaky as airplane wifi can be, it’s no longer the disconnect it once was.

Post reply on HN