Apple to Bypass Internet and Beam Directly to Phones

[ronwagn + 6,290]

https://www.fastcompany.com/90446468/apple-wants-to-bypass-carriers-and-beam-internet-data-directly-to-iphones-via-satellites

Questions: Will this avoid 5G? How would it compare to StarLink? Who will be first? Apple has the most money but is starting late. RCW

Apple wants to bypass carriers and beam internet data directly to iPhones via satellites

 

 

 

[John Foote + 1,135]

Motorola had that dream, Iridium I think they called it. Bankrupted the company. I think the US Navy still pays to keep the satellites going.

Apple does have deeper pockets, fear of competition verses the arrogance Motorola had, and of course technology has come a long way. However I don't see how you could get around the latency issues.  

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 12/21/2019 at 7:28 PM, John Foote said:

I don't see how you could get around the latency issues.  

International phone calls over fiber are already possible.  One of the advantages of space-based communication is that light travels faster in a vacuum, reducing latency. 

[John Foote + 1,135]

On 3/12/2020 at 10:15 AM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

International phone calls over fiber are already possible.  One of the advantages of space-based communication is that light travels faster in a vacuum, reducing latency. 

I understand that, but a huge amount of the 5G potential isn't communications, it robotics, auto-driving vehicles, where distances to signals and replies matter a lot. Feeding this Internet of Everything is what drives the biz model where I am today. The amount of processing power being embedded into so many devices that are inter-connected is scary. For most communications, the time lag doesn't really, you are absolutely correct. But for self driving vehicles tied in with most other things moving on the road, decentralization, the information used as close to the source, matters even if the differences are fractions of seconds. 

One of modern finances bizzaro world things. Huge server farms with AI making trades fill up buildings on Wall Street, which are essentially peopleless. As these crazy trading algorithms try to out-pace/out-maneuver each other, being closest to the trade for execution matters. And. we are talking billiononths of a second to have an edge.  I supposed those algorithms are kind of f'd now. They are great for fighting it out amount each other, but how they handle fundamental change, hmmm, I wonder. 

For fun I used to set up a TV on an over the air HD signal, watch on Satellite, and stream. Shocking the time discrepancies on a live feed. I don't think it's distance that was causing most of the differences. The days of clean signals not being processed are long gone.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,137]

Actually since I am in somewhat of bitchy mode a trifle rant is in order. A few month's ago we re_tvd the rv along with the satteltie system. During the pause in service I hooked up the off the air antenna and the picture was stunning. All those yrs of paying for high def tv and all I was getting was SD. I. WANT A REFUND. Ok rant over where's my check.

[Alfred + 4]

Any latency over satelite feeds depends on which type of satelite you use. Geosynchronous orbit satelites (Stationary) are necessarily 35,786 km away from earth and the signal delay going up to and coming back from these satelites is about 0.5 seconds, if there is only one jump. It is simple mathematics, ie, how long does the signal take to cover 71.572‬, travelling at the speed of light, ie 300.000 km/h?

On the other hand, elyptical satelites orbit much closer to earth, with a much lower latency. But since they do not stay above the same spot, they require tracking receivers that can follow them in the sky and jump from one satelite to another, as they cross the sky and disappear on the horizon. The Motorola project was based on elyptical orbit satelites and I would presume that the Apple project will also use this type os satelite,

[nsdp + 447]

On 3/12/2020 at 10:15 AM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

International phone calls over fiber are already possible.  One of the advantages of space-based communication is that light travels faster in a vacuum, reducing latency. 

The difference between call speed between satellites and ground phones vs fiber is negative.  You have distortion problems between the satellite and the phone in the magnetosphere and Ionosphere so checksums  to prevent dropouts actually delay the conversation;  Ignoring atmospherics effects a satellite phone connection is maybe1-2km/s faster than fiber optic .

Edited April 29, 2020 by nsdp

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

On 12/22/2019 at 2:28 AM, John Foote said:

Motorola had that dream, Iridium I think they called it. Bankrupted the company. I think the US Navy still pays to keep the satellites going.

Apple does have deeper pockets, fear of competition verses the arrogance Motorola had, and of course technology has come a long way. However I don't see how you could get around the latency issues.  

Iridium was only ever good for voice. Still used by some remote and marine customers a lot.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

On 4/29/2020 at 2:20 AM, nsdp said:

The difference between call speed between satellites and ground phones vs fiber is negative.  You have distortion problems between the satellite and the phone in the magnetosphere and Ionosphere so checksums  to prevent dropouts actually delay the conversation;  Ignoring atmospherics effects a satellite phone connection is maybe1-2km/s faster than fiber optic .

What do you mean? ITU-T defines "interactive rate" communication as 200ms roundtrip tops. This pretty much precludes geostationary satellites. Circuit-switched fiber is fast enough to anywhere in the world. Also, nobody has yet demonstrated a low-power satellite up-link. It remains a substantial device. Satellites are great for downstream data though.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

On 4/28/2020 at 6:02 PM, Alfred said:

Any latency over satelite feeds depends on which type of satelite you use. Geosynchronous orbit satelites (Stationary) are necessarily 35,786 km away from earth and the signal delay going up to and coming back from these satelites is about 0.5 seconds, if there is only one jump. It is simple mathematics, ie, how long does the signal take to cover 71.572‬, travelling at the speed of light, ie 300.000 km/h?

On the other hand, elyptical satelites orbit much closer to earth, with a much lower latency. But since they do not stay above the same spot, they require tracking receivers that can follow them in the sky and jump from one satelite to another, as they cross the sky and disappear on the horizon. The Motorola project was based on elyptical orbit satelites and I would presume that the Apple project will also use this type os satelite,

You need roundtrip to be less than 200ms for interactive voice. Moto's Iridium is a LEO constellation. The only ones who ever used highly elliptical satellites for bi-di comms are the Russians, AFAIK

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molniya_orbit

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tundra_orbit

XM Satellite radio is that, to give you the closest US example. Tracking is not that hard. Instead of staying in one spot like GEO, such a satellite only moves up or down, but not sideways, when looked at from the ground. (XM Satellite actually missed badly and has the best reception around Tahiti. Still works well enough for an automotive grade receiver, though)

[Meredith Poor + 852]

Starlink, dharlink.

[Starschy + 160]

Such an action would Apple cost a lot of Marketshare. Does large Providers German, Swiss, Russian Telecomm would kill their Apple contracts.

[specinho + 276]

On 12/21/2019 at 3:55 AM, ronwagn said:

Apple wants to bypass carriers and beam internet data directly to iPhones via satellites

 

On 12/22/2019 at 9:28 AM, John Foote said:

Motorola had that dream, Iridium I think they called it. Bankrupted the company. I think the US Navy still pays to keep the satellites going. 

 

On 3/12/2020 at 11:15 PM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

International phone calls over fiber are already possible.  One of the advantages of space-based communication is that light travels faster in a vacuum, reducing latency. 

pardon me....... I do not know much about how these things work. Out of curiosity.....

Vaguely recall all signals of radio, TV, walkie talkie etc were transmitted via reflection upon hitting ionosphere.

A check on the earliest telephone, e.g. switchboard, invented in the 17th century, only microphone, earphone, sound waves  and electric signals were needed. No satellite............

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone

quote:"In 1928, WRGB (then W2XB) was started as the world's first television station. It broadcast from the General Electric facility in Schenectady, New York. It was popularly known as "WGY Television".

No satellite............

 

Satellite might not have invented before  Oct 1957. A quick link to google says satellite provides information about Earth e.g. cloud, ocean, land and air.

 

 

 

Satellites provide information about Earth's clouds, oceans, land and air. They also can observe wildfires, volcanoes and smoke. All this information helps scientists predict weather and climate. It helps farmers know what crops to plant.8 Feb 2017

Mind me have a question.......... Why do we need satellites for telecommunication and TV for?? 😳

 

 

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 4/6/2020 at 8:15 PM, Eyes Wide Open said:

Actually since I am in somewhat of bitchy mode a trifle rant is in order. A few month's ago we re_tvd the rv along with the satteltie system. During the pause in service I hooked up the off the air antenna and the picture was stunning. All those yrs of paying for high def tv and all I was getting was SD. I. WANT A REFUND. Ok rant over where's my check.

Do you live in a major city?

[ronwagn + 6,290]

On 4/6/2020 at 7:43 PM, John Foote said:

I understand that, but a huge amount of the 5G potential isn't communications, it robotics, auto-driving vehicles, where distances to signals and replies matter a lot. Feeding this Internet of Everything is what drives the biz model where I am today. The amount of processing power being embedded into so many devices that are inter-connected is scary. For most communications, the time lag doesn't really, you are absolutely correct. But for self driving vehicles tied in with most other things moving on the road, decentralization, the information used as close to the source, matters even if the differences are fractions of seconds. 

One of modern finances bizzaro world things. Huge server farms with AI making trades fill up buildings on Wall Street, which are essentially peopleless. As these crazy trading algorithms try to out-pace/out-maneuver each other, being closest to the trade for execution matters. And. we are talking billiononths of a second to have an edge.  I supposed those algorithms are kind of f'd now. They are great for fighting it out amount each other, but how they handle fundamental change, hmmm, I wonder. 

For fun I used to set up a TV on an over the air HD signal, watch on Satellite, and stream. Shocking the time discrepancies on a live feed. I don't think it's distance that was causing most of the differences. The days of clean signals not being processed are long gone.

I am using Dish. I have an ATT fiber connection (probably limited speed) modem but I have several "hoppers" for other TVs and they are all delayed a few seconds. 

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,137]

Yes I do Ron, the picture quality was stunning as compared to Dish. Night and day, most HD is done by the sports industry and watching those programs in Off The Air broadcasting left a very bad taste in my mouth. 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

16 hours ago, specinho said:

 

 

pardon me....... I do not know much about how these things work. Out of curiosity.....

Vaguely recall all signals of radio, TV, walkie talkie etc were transmitted via reflection upon hitting ionosphere.

 

A check on the earliest telephone, e.g. switchboard, invented in the 17th century, only microphone, earphone, sound waves  and electric signals were needed. No satellite............

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone

quote:"In 1928, WRGB (then W2XB) was started as the world's first television station. It broadcast from the General Electric facility in Schenectady, New York. It was popularly known as "WGY Television".

No satellite............

 

 

Satellite might not have invented before  Oct 1957. A quick link to google says satellite provides information about Earth e.g. cloud, ocean, land and air.

 

 

 

Satellites provide information about Earth's clouds, oceans, land and air. They also can observe wildfires, volcanoes and smoke. All this information helps scientists predict weather and climate. It helps farmers know what crops to plant.8 Feb 2017

Mind me have a question.......... Why do we need satellites for telecommunication and TV for?? 😳

 

 

Fiber optic cables and laser communication between satellites both have higher bandwidth than radio signals. I.e. you can transfer more data.

The old radio systems are good for AM/FM radio and a few TV channels - but this is "broadcasting". Everyone receives the same signal; you can't send data or private communications by radio.

Point-to-point communications have always been wired. Started with the telegraph, then telephone, then internet over telephone, then internet over cable, then dedicated fiber optic data lines. Satellites will allow that level of bandwidth without laying thousands of miles of cables.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

1 hour ago, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Fiber optic cables and laser communication between satellites both have higher bandwidth than radio signals. I.e. you can transfer more data.

The old radio systems are good for AM/FM radio and a few TV channels - but this is "broadcasting". Everyone receives the same signal; you can't send data or private communications by radio.

Point-to-point communications have always been wired. Started with the telegraph, then telephone, then internet over telephone, then internet over cable, then dedicated fiber optic data lines. Satellites will allow that level of bandwidth without laying thousands of miles of cables.

There is point-to-point microwave radio, which is right up there with fiber in bandwidth.

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 11/5/2021 at 7:04 AM, Andrei Moutchkine said:

There is point-to-point microwave radio, which is right up there with fiber in bandwidth.

Interesting. Thank you.

Just to clarify, is this a viable solution for global internet service?

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

On 11/5/2021 at 11:57 AM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Fiber optic cables and laser communication between satellites both have higher bandwidth than radio signals. I.e. you can transfer more data.

The old radio systems are good for AM/FM radio and a few TV channels - but this is "broadcasting". Everyone receives the same signal; you can't send data or private communications by radio.

Point-to-point communications have always been wired. Started with the telegraph, then telephone, then internet over telephone, then internet over cable, then dedicated fiber optic data lines. Satellites will allow that level of bandwidth without laying thousands of miles of cables.

Huawei is selling a microwave trunk radio good for 600 Gbit/s and there are startups claiming to do more. Random overview from googling

https://www.microwave-link.com/

claiming 60% of global backhaul connections for mobile telephony are made of the stuff. The architecture of IP sat data is the same as for a DOCSIS cableco and it is now multicast, not broadcast. If you've got several satellites, you can send private data. It's been that way for over 20 years. See

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headend_in_the_Sky

(it is the panultimate headend for all of the world's cablecos, and  it is satellite based)

Now, tell me more about your magical uplink. How will you achieve fiber-like bandwidth there? The microwave trunk devices I mention could do that, but they are not exactly hand-held and require LOS as good as laser's.

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

On 11/8/2021 at 2:18 PM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Interesting. Thank you.

Just to clarify, is this a viable solution for global internet service?

Yes and no. It is already used for a good portion of mobile backhaul (source I gave above say 60%) Most interesting is the wired segment. Say, does your telco own the actual cable that is in the ground? There is a residual concept of Netzebene in German law that considers the coax network a part of public infrastructure in Germany, but I don't think anybody has ever challenged the major ISPs on that.

Here is an example of Canadian yokels who seem to know no evil.

https://lindsaybb.com/products/business-connectivity/small-cell-connectivity/indoor-1ru-docsis-backhaul-gateway-lbidg-ca/

Don't think you can OFFICIALLY hang a shelf-sided cable headend of your own to your telcos cox in Canada, can you? The technological enabler for that is a technology called RFOG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_frequency_over_glass

which is not much of a technology. Basically, the telco, which is supposed to have a hybrid-fiber network, abuses the lasers as providers of timing. The wire protocol on the fiber remains the same as with RF. This enables the telco to use a range of free energy devices compatible to what the optical guys call "passive" The range I've seen from Arris equipment is about the same as for the better laser - 120 km. The problem is that this creates an analog RF mess the ISP does not really control. As in no access control. Arris and Lindsay RFOG modem will charmingly clone the MAC from any existing DOCSIS cable modem for you and patch you through with the speed appropriate for a PON (passive optical network, which is just another name for Ether-based fiber, which is supposed to be passive/unpowered and unidirectional, but is really neither)

Can you do worse than this? Yes you can. In the realm of traditional TDM subscriber lines. The lowly Nazi DSL box on a lowly phone-grade copper pair, which was always limping behind coax is now has timing so precise as to run up to 32768QAM and is basically a 155Mbit/s ATM relay/switch. So, the customers ARE already doing their ISPs work synchronizing with the SONET backhaul, while paying the ISP/telco for the privilege of doing nothing. A telltale sign an ISP is doing this if they demand their customers put the box on UPS, motivating with utter necessity to call 911 or some such. The real reason is that they don't have a very reliable session control, which is even worse than RFOG free-for-all. That is, once a client box is synced, they cannot tell very well whether it is alive or dead and they are seeing random noise on that line. I think Verizon did that in sections of Arizona and whatever Liberty Media (bad, bad people) associates are responsible for New Zealand. Note that a classical TDM phone company also used coax for most of their network (T3 level) That stuff is not microwave, but what you can see as very quiet whispers in the audible voice range.

Now that various telcos have been merging every each possible way, the two technologies are together. My cableco for example will patch me through to an unknown T3 some 70 km away. I am then thrown off by a clever Cisco or Huawei box which uses VT groups (means I cannot sign up for a single T3, but need to pick a specific collection of them making up a (fractional) E4's worth that are not sequential) Work in progress. Obviously, this wouldn't be difficult to defeat with bigger equipment budget than I have

To get back to you. Yes, it is a solution that is free and anonymous, but likely not quite legal. Even though it should be.

Edited March 30 by Andrei Moutchkine

[turbguy + 1,069]

On 3/12/2020 at 9:15 AM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

International phone calls over fiber are already possible.  One of the advantages of space-based communication is that light travels faster in a vacuum, reducing latency. 

No very much faster. 

[Andrei Moutchkine + 673]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

No very much faster. 

By about a factor of x1.5 compared to singlemode fiber

https://www.blog.adva.com/en/speed-light-fiber-first-building-block-low-latency-trading-infrastructure

Contrary to whatever these guys are selling it is hardly ever a decisive factor anywhere, including fast trading. Note that space lasers connecting satellites will likely have to cover way more distance than 1.5x ground distance and will thus be somewhat slower latency-wise. Depending on that specific distance, the difference might actually matter.

[specinho + 276]

On 11/5/2021 at 6:57 PM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

Fiber optic cables and laser communication between satellites both have higher bandwidth than radio signals. I.e. you can transfer more data.

The old radio systems are good for AM/FM radio and a few TV channels - but this is "broadcasting". Everyone receives the same signal; you can't send data or private communications by radio.

Point-to-point communications have always been wired. Started with the telegraph, then telephone, then internet over telephone, then internet over cable, then dedicated fiber optic data lines. Satellites will allow that level of bandwidth without laying thousands of miles of cables.

Not sure if this illustration is correct............. the sky is the limit? If a TV programme can be broadcasted without a satellite in the late 20's, that might mean images could be sent without a satellite?

Shall for high security communication purpose,  a satellite is put up, what is the story on competition to cover the earth with it? 😳

To deflect potential hit of asteroid? 😯

A theory was up recently........... will pool game be helpful to knock it off?? Say M1V1 = M2V2. Anyone is up to do a simulation? 👾

[ronwagn + 6,290]

How about CB radio and HAM radio for conversations? They are good for conversations and even very private conversations which are in code of any kind.