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.
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.
> 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?
> 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.
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.
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.
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”
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.
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.
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.
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.
This is hardly TDS. Elon made his own 'gestures' then went to an AfD rally to clarify his position with a bullhorn in case some didn't hear the dog whistle.
I lost almost all respect for Elon Musk when he started calling a rescue diver "pedo guy". Up until this point, I was enthusiastic about his company's accomplishments in aerospace and electric vehicles.
Now I would love to see him fulfill his dream of being a Martian pioneer - as long as he doesn't return to earth. In my view, he is an embarrassment to the tech community and the United States. His childish and petty behavior has no place in a civil society.
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.
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).
Readit News
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.
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?
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.
> “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...
Anyway T-Mobile is the partner here, not SpaceX
> 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...
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.
It’s just business
TDS should not be tolerated in polite society.
Now I would love to see him fulfill his dream of being a Martian pioneer - as long as he doesn't return to earth. In my view, he is an embarrassment to the tech community and the United States. His childish and petty behavior has no place in a civil society.
Nazism should not be tolerated in polite society.
- IRS - FBI - Some tax collecting / assistance group
You’d think the first two know where I live enough to come and collect…
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.
This seems like a stupid idea on so many levels.
> Access will be available "regardless of your carrier plan"
https://www.pcmag.com/news/googles-pixel-9-phones-get-their-...
Deleted Comment
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).
[0] https://5g.systemsapproach.org/core.html
And 15 and 14. I don't know about 13.
So you don't even need the latest gear to do it.