Apple and SpaceX link up to support Starlink satellite network on iPhones
249 comments
·January 29, 2025colonial
Smart move. As a Verizon/Android customer, I'm a little miffed that my carrier is going with ASTS's quasi-vaporware over the proven Starlink constellation - baking support into the OS avoids unhappy customers and loaded *'s next to features.
ivanjovanovic
I see you don't understand the technological advantage AST has in comparison with Starlink Direct-To-Cell connection. They are some years ahead in this game.
AST is already testing full broadband 5G technology fully integrated into the terrestrial networks without interference with Vodafone and AT&T and will get Verizon beta testing approval very soon.
What Starlink D2C currently has is a spotty text service with such a low signal strength that is useless for anything more. That is what they got approval for from FCC because any stronger signal is causing unacceptable interference with the current terrestrial networks and the terrestrial providers didn't agree to allow them more than that. It will take a year or two at least for Starlink to get to provide more than text and that is actually stated as well in the T-Mobile press release about this.
Other thing is difference in AST and Starlink architecture which makes Starlink not easy to properly integrate in the terrestrial networks since they have gNodeB modules on the satellite, where AST is integrating with the gNodeB modules on the ground.
There are many details that make AST leading in the game of direct-to-cell communication in comparison to other solutions. They just got 1B in cash from investors to expand and speed up deployment of their network, so calling them vaporware might not age well when in couple weeks they start releasing the testing results.
lxgr
> any stronger signal is causing unacceptable interference with the current terrestrial networks
I actually never understood that argument. Why would it be harder to tolerate interference from an adjacent frequency base station hundreds of kilometers away than that of one one roof over?
Are Starlink's band pass filters really bad, or do terrestrial networks depend on geometric isolation (via topography or the horizon) to a larger extent than space-based transmission protocols?
piltdownman
> technological advantage AST has in comparison with Starlink Direct-To-Cell
Unverified and unverifiable to date. Unacceptable for an ex-SPAC which nearly got delisted from the exchanges when it dropped to $2 a share a few months back.
>Other thing is difference in AST and Starlink architecture which makes Starlink not easy to properly integrate in the terrestrial networks since they have gNodeB modules on the satellite, where AST is integrating with the gNodeB modules on the ground.
Their bent-pipe architecture is going to have to do a LOT of heavy-lifting to mitigate the impacts of their anti-doppler mechanisms on top of the latency, SNR and jitter. Whole thing hinges on Bluebirds phased-array performance and their ability to handover cells at scale - presuming they've achieved a fraction of what they claim to have achieved using unmodified commercial handsets in real-world environments.
Schadenfreude at SpaceXs very understandable FCC interference issues is a bad look considering ASTS are wholly dependent on SpaceX to put their constellation into LEO!
>There are many details that make AST leading in the game of direct-to-cell communication in comparison to other solutions.
A deSPAC with no major R&D heads of note, headed by an Auteur (Abel Avellan) whose only credence is partnerships with Rakuten/Vodafone leading to board seats.
ASTS have missed every single self-imposed roadmap delivery milestone, have had to hit up their ATM, previously lost 80% of their value from NAV, and are propped up pricewise by a small float and a rabid reddit-style fanbase as a holdover from the SPAC days. They've proven absolutely nothing so far, despite many lofty claims to the contrary, and Rakuten has already hit them up with a multi-million dollar fine for what was effectively non-delivery.
ivanjovanovic
So, there are several untrue things here.
Fact that AST is deSPAC has nothing to do with this. AST has gone out of that phase stellarly.
Second, technological advantages are very verified, by AST doing 20 Mbps download and 5G calls and extremely good spectral efficiency.
Definitely both architectures have pros and cons, but for the fixed-earth cells the bent-pipe is way more optimal then constant switching of the cell position which Starlink has.
ASTS has missed some deadlines, but they are not centering divs, they really do innovation from the first principles and that takes some time. Check TSLA which is 10 years into "we are getting FSD next year out"
Rakuten didn't hit them with the fine, but they exercised a contractual right to get 10 million dollar back if they don't deliver something, but same Rakuten is officially promoting the 2026 as start of the commercial coverage for Japan, if we are taking them as authority.
SpaceX is definitely not the only one on whom they depend for delivery since they use ISRO from India for the first satellite, Falcon9 for the next 8 and New Glen for the rest. And given that they have enough money, they can as well go back to more SpaceX if needed since they have agreement with them.
It is interesting that company without research team has so many patents on this technology and partners with Google, AT&T, Verizon, Vodafone, Rakuten, American Tower and that none of them is seeing how hoax they are. Maybe they will come here and get actually enlightened.
You can check on Starlink test, and what people are reporting here https://x.com/CatSE___ApeX___/status/1884304059110470050
lxgr
Competition is important. I do find it very impressive what Starlink has achieved so far, but it would make me very nervous if nobody else were even trying.
giancarlostoro
So T-Mobile is partnering with Starlink to let people send SMS. This is insanely impressive, you could be in the middle of nowhere, and send an emergency text that otherwise would have gone nowhere.
stogot
Is it still only line of site emergencies? Or is it that they solved the line of site issue?
voxic11
It works indoors and under tree cover if that is what you are asking.
> “Among other results, the satellites have been able to communicate with multiple models of unmodified Samsung, Apple, and Google devices using (T-Mobile’s) PCS G Block spectrum, including in urban and rural areas, indoors and outdoors, and in clear sky and under tree cover”
https://www.pcmag.com/news/spacex-cellular-starlink-system-w...
gigatexal
Why Apple is getting into bed with Elon is beyond me. As a customer with tens of thousands spent at Apple and stocks to boot I don’t like this.
inemesitaffia
You want to go Android where Google is a shareholder of Starlink and also supports this on Samsung phones?
Anyway T-Mobile is the partner here, not SpaceX
GeekyBear
Google and Starlink are direct partners.
> Under the partnership, SpaceX will locate Starlink ground stations within Google’s data centre properties.
https://theincmagazine.com/google-cloud-has-signed-a-deal-wi...
inemesitaffia
I know that.
Starlink used to run in Google cloud and appeared as Google Fi on speed test websites.
But this direct to cell product, the customer is T-Mobile and SpaceX is the seller.
T-Mobile has a partnership with Apple. And modifying phones to support these services is part of what is done
crowcroft
What satellite internet provider should people use instead?
inemesitaffia
Globalstar or Iridium which are SpaceX partners
brianwawok
You mean the ones that are 10x higher in orbit and iPhones can’t communicate with?
pjerem
Same situation, I'm actually thinking about not buying Apple anymore.
inemesitaffia
T-Mobile is the partner.
lxgr
Given that this uses standards and protocols iPhones largely already support and are licensed for, not supporting it would seem more like active blocking at some point.
As an iPhone user, I really don’t need more instances of Apple telling me what I’m allowed to do at a software level, and on top of that Apple has had no problem allowing network connectivity to networks under all kinds of interesting ownership.
scyzoryk_xyz
I don’t think it’s as simple as just Elon. These are enormous companies solving large problems with the objective of delivering value at highest possible profit margin to customers.
It’s just business
amazingamazing
Why not? It's adding more functionality. Even if Apple used Globalstar, they're a partner of SpaceX and thus still "in bed" with Elon. Even if they didn't use satellite stuff at all, Apple's current CEO donated to Trump's inauguration, along with... you guessed it, Elon.
Cthulhu_
Elon or SpaceX? It's important to separate the person and their actions and the company. I wouldn't be surprised / hope that long term Musk leaves or is ousted from SpaceX entirely.
mort96
Elon. He's the front man and CEO of the company. Just like Tim is for Apple.
lxgr
The actual reason why the two aren't comparable is that Elon is not just the CEO, but also a significant owner of SpaceX (42% equity; 79% voting control, according to Wikipedia). Tim Cook owns less than 1% of Apple.
true_religion
They were planning this for months, if not years.
Oarch
Very soon all my memes will come directly from the edge of space and I think that's nice
hshshshshsh
Edge of space is a meme.
newsclues
Data Centres in Space, with space based AI creating and sharing memes would be nice.
lxgr
Or we can just keep them on Earth and use the delta-v for something more useful.
1oooqooq
you mean scamer sms about extending your car warranty will come from space... because that's all this deal is about.
duxup
It’s amazing, some day I get a dozen or more calls from:
- IRS - FBI - Some tax collecting / assistance group
You’d think the first two know where I live enough to come and collect…
hu3
and it's going to be summarized by AI to sound more legit.
noname120
With do they have to partner up with T-Mobile if the iPhones will directly communicate with Starlink satellites? Wouldn't piggybacking off the Wi-Fi call technology be enough and less friction for customers?
I don't think it would be unreasonable to require customers to have a really cheap mobile plan with no internet if they want to do calls outside of iMessager/WhatsApp/Messenger/etc.
GeekyBear
The Google/Starlink emergency SOS partnership in the contiguous US 48 States doesn't require that you to be a T-Mobile customer.
> Access will be available "regardless of your carrier plan"
https://www.pcmag.com/news/googles-pixel-9-phones-get-their-...
ryao
My understanding is that the starlink satellites will use T-Mobile’s spectrum to communicate with the cellphones, which requires a partnership.
withinboredom
Doesn’t 5G from space cause all kinds of issues with other things? Even if they share terrestrial spectrum, it will be broadcast from the sky.
This seems like a stupid idea on so many levels.
lxgr
What issues are you thinking about?
It's up to the network operator to efficiently manage their spectrum in a way that does not interfere with other radio users, and mutually between their own base stations.
If T-Mobile/Starlink manage to do that, you get additional connectivity in remote areas on your existing devices. If they don't, and their own network quality degrades, you can switch networks; if they degrade other networks' quality (actually, not just as a hypothetical), hopefully the FCC will shut them down.
OnACoffeeBreak
Starlink to T-Mobile is using PCS spectrum (1850 – 1990 MHz) licensed to T-Mobile to provide Directo-to-Cell (DTC) service, not whole 5G spectrum.
null
lxgr
Are you suggesting that the satellites should be using Wi-Fi spectrum?
That would not be possible, as neither access points nor clients are licensed to use nearly enough transmission power to bridge the distances required (and if they were, the spectrum would become usable for terrestrial uses).
ignoramous
Starlink probably takesover from the Core [0], while T-Mobile provides Radio Access Network.
Ancalagon
Wow this might be the best update in years
pixxel
Yes isn’t it wonderful. Coming to all ‘smart’ devices including dumb televisions. Bypassing networks has never been such wow.
batch12
Doesn't that risk already exist with existing technology?
joshstrange
It absolutely does and has been talked about for many years. This doesn’t really change anything unless you lived in a place that didn’t get cell signal.
alp1n3_eth
Garmin's smartwatch line and SOS communicators now have a massive target on their back. Now that the satellite availability issues are going to be solved, they just need to push battery life further for the watches and they'll be golden.
There will be no point other than simplicity / physical buttons to get a Garmin watch over an Apple watch if you have an iPhone pretty soon.
Garmin w/ eink screen, not great app, bad Apple compatibility = $300, latest AW series 10 = $380
bn-usd-mistake
Garmin still has training readiness, training status, training plans, suggested event-based workouts and much longer battery life which makes them work better for endurance (hobby) athletes.
On the other hand, Garmin UX is horrible and the watch faces are utterly ugly
(saying as former Apple Watch owner and now Garmin FR 965)
lxgr
If you don’t care at all about battery life and, as you say, have an iPhone (the majority of smartphone users globally doesn’t, I believe).
jajko
Popularity of Garmins go way beyond what you try for some reason reduce it to.
These are serious sport and adventure watches, apple doesnt really have a comparable product for many folks, ie for me or my wife (who has apple+garmin mix). I personally also prefer wearing round watches than blocky mini phone. Latest garmins, any garmins, with oled displays look much cooler.
myflash13
What does this actually mean in practice? Internet service everywhere even when out of range of a cell tower? Does it work indoors?
grishka
Definitely not everywhere. Starlink cares a lot about national borders, neutralizing the one major advantage it has over most other internet access technologies. This just begs me to say "you had one job".
zild3d
> Starlink cares a lot about national borders
Isn't is moreso that _laws_ care a lot about national borders? And Starlink has to care about laws to operate?
connicpu
Well, Starlink has been known to provide roaming services in countries they haven't reached a full agreement with yet, with the exception of the ones who legitimately might have the power to shoot down SpaceX satellites if they got angry enough (India, China, Russia).
nroets
If you're resident in a country where StarLink is legal (like Mozambique), you can procure the service and then roam in a country where it's illegal like South Africa. I don't think that will ever change.
StarLink's definition of "resident" and "roaming" might change a little bit over time.
StarLink has been quite good in surrounding the countries where they stand to make a lot of money (like South Africa) with "friendly" countries. So, due to roaming, South Africa is losing out on a lot of tax revenue (VAT) and other economic benefits. Speculation is that they will give in.
lxgr
Are you sure this is still true?
I remember hearing that this used to be the case, but this is a pretty blatant violation of international law and regulations, and I think by now roaming is also technically disabled in countries that didn't grant them a license.
Their own support site is a bit ambiguous:
> If your new location is not in an authorized territory (marked "Available" or "Waitlist" on the Starlink map), your service may be immediately suspended.
lxgr
> "you had one job"
Violating international treaties and national law of almost all countries and potentially getting their assets seized, or worst case serving as a casus belli (economic or kinetic) in case the US does not enforce claims of other nations against them?
lupusreal
Starlink disregards national borders when the US government gives them the greenlight for that, not otherwise. That's why it works in Iran. SpaceX / Starlink are an American company with personnel and property on the ground, they cannot simply defy their host government and do whatever they want, causing diplomatic incidents where they please. That's not realistic.
duxup
Yeah the list of governments where they defy the local government is mostly VERY isolated (politically) countries. They’re certainly not in the business of simply providing access everywhere based on principles.
spwa4
It seems right now, assuming you're in the test (is anyone that is not working for Apple?), an emergency button (no voice, no text, no nothing, other than the fact that you pressed the button and a location, not sure how accurate) (I guess maybe it's as featured as the Google feature)
MAYBE in the future text messaging service. Text only.
Note: Text messaging currently actually works on some Samsung phones on T-mobile, if you request to join the beta.
https://www.pcmag.com/news/t-mobile-begins-cellular-starlink...
Emergency SOS over Starlink works on recent pixel phones, which appears to provide text chat with emergency services:
wkat4242
> Latest iPhone update poised to work with upcoming service
Um well yeah the whole idea of starlink direct to cell is that it works with unmodified mobile phones so this isn't really a suprise.
What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar. Which is kinda their moat since all attempts on the Android side have failed (qualcomm had a deal with iridium and killed it within the year before it even launched, and bullitt (CAT/Motorola) which had a deal with Inmarsat went bankrupt. The sat part was spun off but without ongoing hardware releases this will be a dead end.
pxeboot
> Which is kinda their moat since all attempts on the Android side have failed
The latest Pixels have Satellite SOS [1].
[1] https://support.google.com/pixelphone/answer/15254448?hl=en
wkat4242
Oh I see, I missed that, probably didn't make the news here as it's only in the US (so far at least). Sorry. Of course Apple's feature started out US-only too so I hope Google will expand their reach too.
Shank
> What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar
Apple hates being dependent on one company. They always use competing suppliers in their chain because it gives them more leverage. SpaceX vs Globalstar is a good strategy if one or the other has a problem or wants to negotiate something crazy.
In the past they’ve even sourced iPhone processors from both TSMC and Samsung (albeit mixed results).
teruakohatu
I am pretty sure Apple could buy Globalstar without even noticing the cash, and Globalstar might be dead if it wasn’t for Apple (Apple owns 20% of Globalstar).
I don’t think Apple needs the financial leverage, I think they don’t want to put all their bets on a lame horse.
karlgkk
Globalstar fulfills the most crucial product requirement: emergency contact
Starlink - by design - is not going to have as good coverage (at least, at a mass market consumer price). And that’s okay
It’ll be interesting to see if Apple rolls out data via Starlink
JumpCrisscross
> Apple could buy Globalstar without even noticing the cash
They’d certainly notice the management headache.
GeekyBear
> What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink
Starlink is expected to offer greater bandwidth in the future, but Globalstar allowed Apple to start offering emergency SOS service with 2022 devices.
1oooqooq
i get instant alerts from starlink if i even smell anything that they think looks like torrent. so many false positives with wireguard and almost as useful of customer support as google.
CharlesW
> What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar.
Generally, Apple abhors single-supplier relationships. Having multiple suppliers reduces risk, improves their negotiation leverage, etc.
imoverclocked
> What surprises me more is that apple is even working with starlink considering they have a competing service together with globalstar
Apple also works with competing terrestrial cellular network companies.
wkat4242
True but terrestrial networks are offering generic service directly to consumers. Apple's deal with globalstar is fully part of apple's offer. I don't think they even mention globalstar.
It's also a USP for Apple in the mobile market right now.
JumpCrisscross
> terrestrial networks are offering generic service directly to consumers. Apple's deal with globalstar is fully part of apple's offer
Globalstar is entirely abstracted away from the consumer. In that manner, it’s similar to TSMC. (Though far less critical.)
karlgkk
Globalstar has substantially better coverage, but their constellation is in a much higher orbit. Starlink will be useful for actual internet access and lower cost emergency response messaging cost, but GS is going to be an important backup.
lxgr
I've always assumed that there would be at least some modifications required on the phone firmware side.
5G (at least the non-NTN ,non-IoT variants) is just too chatty to support cell sizes that big, is my suspicion. If you can get the phones to go into a special "texting only" mode (whether that's over IP using IMS, which also seems somewhat chatty, or something lower level and more efficient), that would probably help a lot, and I assume this is what Apple is doing in this firmware update.
wkat4242
Yeah I always wondered about that too. How do you stop it from sending too much and cluttering the entire area (media access control is another issue because the satellite will 'see' a much wider area than the phone).
I imagine though that Starlink DTC will only be visible to phones in really remote areas, as it uses the same frequenties as terrestrial network it will be easily overwhelmed by traffic from nearby towers.
lxgr
I'd expect them to use at least some amount of exclusive spectrum for this service, or there would be issues in fringe areas in at least the uplink (the satellite couldn't selectively tune out phones talking to terrestrial towers if they are using the same frequencies that phone-to-satellite comms are using).
mg
Do I understand it correctly, that the satellite communicates with a ground station and the ground station communicates with the phones?
It's not that the phone communicates directly with the satellite, right?
murderfs
No, that would be utterly pointless. It's LTE from the sky: https://www.starlink.com/business/direct-to-cell
invalidopcode
Not pointless, that's the best use of Starlink with phones. Base station backhaul gets the benefits of not having to run fiber + space for a bigger antenna w/ better signal to noise ratio
arghwhat
SNR is not a function of antenna size. The size is dictated by the wavelength, not how desperate you are to receive a signal.
Directionality does make an antenna larger as it usually involves reflectors and directors, the size and placement of which is also a fraction of the wavelength, but if they are actually able to do direct to phone with decent reception and arbitrary coverage, then that beats having to set up base stations to cover a small circle even if you get 10-15 dB better SNR.
This might give you LTE in, say, all of the Australian outback, all of Alaska, along the Andes mountain range, etc.
aaomidi
I don’t think availability of fiber is the bottleneck here.
mg
A phone has enough transmission power to communicate with a satellite?
I would think the electromagnetic waves the phone sends are going out in a sphere, right? Then the loss on the way to the satellite must be gigantic.
reaperducer
A phone has enough transmission power to communicate with a satellite?
For the last 30 years.
And the Starlink satellites are much closer to Earth than the satellites we used to hit back then.
null
kelseydh
It's curious how this hooks up to existing telecom networks. I always thought of Starlink as eventually bankrupting them.
esskay
Phone -> Starlink Sat for the initial connection. That then pings to a starlink groundstation, then it gets routed over their fiber to T-Mobile over the internet (its all just data going over fiber anyway).
> fiber
tchock23
Will there be a way to disable this?
gruez
Doesn't it use regular cellular frequencies? You might be able to "disable this" by using manual network selection, but if they use the same mcc mnc as tmobile (their partner), it'll be impossible to distinguish.
lxgr
Probably (I've read that there will be a switch in the carrier settings for T-Mobile USA), but also why would you want to?
In the end, the Starlink satellites will be just another set of cell towers, just with a slightly unusual velocity and altitude. You already can't e.g. disable using T-Mobile base stations leased by a particular land or infrastructure owner.
giancarlostoro
Its only intended for emergencies...
https://support.apple.com/en-us/101573
So by all means, if you rather not be able to text someone that you're in the middle of nowhere in danger with otherwise no signal, I don't see why you would disable that. Like its literally for SOS use.
lxgr
That's a different service (Apple's own, Globalstar-based one) than the one TFA and this discussion are about (i.e. Starlink/SpaceX + T-Mobile USA).
pavon
> Users in the program have a new toggle switch in their iPhone cellular data settings to manage the satellite feature.
zitterbewegung
Don’t use T-Mobile for now.
https://archive.ph/wqnqJ