[Updated] Far Out Stuff - Apple September 2022 Event Thread, Expectations, Reality and stuff.

[Paul Thexton]

So much foaming at the mouth in this thread. I’m embarrassed for most of you. May I suggest that many in here should get their blood pressure checked, just in case.

 

Meanwhile, is it a cool feature that could help people who have a car break down in the middle of nowhere, or get hurt when climbing a peak where there’s no/poor cell coverage? Yes

 

Do/Will Android phones have the same or similar feature? Yes

 

Can you buy a way more featureful specialised device for satcoms? Yes

 

Does this mean Apple aren’t allowed to advertise their feature? No. Because that would be absurd. Equally it would be absurd if Android makers couldn’t advertise a competing feature if they happen to add/release it after this point in time.

 

 

[Obioban]

Apparently the satellite connection will also allow for FindMy location updates, independent of the SOS functionality. 

[Commodus]

3 hours ago, Paul Thexton said:

So much foaming at the mouth in this thread. I’m embarrassed for most of you. May I suggest that many in here should get their blood pressure checked, just in case.

 

Meanwhile, is it a cool feature that could help people who have a car break down in the middle of nowhere, or get hurt when climbing a peak where there’s no/poor cell coverage? Yes

 

Do/Will Android phones have the same or similar feature? Yes

 

Can you buy a way more featureful specialised device for satcoms? Yes

 

Does this mean Apple aren’t allowed to advertise their feature? No. Because that would be absurd. Equally it would be absurd if Android makers couldn’t advertise a competing feature if they happen to add/release it after this point in time.

 

 

The funny thing is that it's arguably the smallest new feature for any phone — it's nice, but it really isn't going to be the make-or-break factor that leads you to pick an iPhone 14 Pro or Mate 50 over, say, a Galaxy S22 or Xiaomi 12. And I don't think a company has to be the absolute first with technology to still provide a meaningful advancement. Apple isn't the first to announce emergency satellite communication, but it'll definitely be the first most people actually can (and want to) buy.

 

I'm reminded of the iPhone X launch. Yes, Essential beat Apple to the notched front camera by a few months, but it was the Essential Phone's only standout hardware feature (there was no depth camera, for instance) and sold only to a very small audience. Innovation only really matters if you can get it into customers' hands.

[Dracarris]

1 hour ago, Commodus said:

Yes, Essential beat Apple to the notched front camera by a few months,

This time it was literally one day (deliberately?), so "first announced" doesn't really make a difference here. Not to mention that the decisive factor is when we'll see phones in the hands of consumers with the feature actually working.

[RedRound2]

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

They state that it's free for 2 years, like I said, and you proceed to go on about using 80% of bandwidth (it's actually 85%).  My "assumptions" are based on well reasoned logic along with things such as the SEC filing.  A company says it's only free for 2 years, and it's simple to see that to run the service Apple is going to have to be paying millions.

So, you basically admitted that they will have to charge for it because it actually costs real money to maintain (not for nickel and diming). That's exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

Then what about 2 years of free? It is definitely not to get people to upgrade their phones. Because that wouldn't make any sense and that wouldn't work. Rather its a stop gate temporary solution for the rest of the market to catchup and make these things a standard free of charge feature. 

 

Do you seriously think Apple, or any other for-profit company is going to maintain a wing that just bleeds millions and millions on the side? They will have to charge for it if they are maintaining it, but then no one would really get it and hence defeats the entire purpose. Hence, they give it for 2 years free, until everything else catches up and there legislation around this.

 

Later they could maybe think of adding some monetization by giving extra useful features like location reporting (already implemented) and maybe low bandwidth texting support. But again, their package needs to be compelling enough for people who want to actually pay for it, which is quite a stretch to imagine.

 

Do I seriously need to keep showing you how to add 1 + 2

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

So again, if lets say they don't get the competition from Starlink, mark my words they are going to be charging people to use it.

You talk about Starlink like how Tesla solved FSD 5 years ago. An upcoming new thing, especially from Musk, should not be treated as an alternative for something we literally have today

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

And you are trying to make me out as one making assumptions.  Guess what, if the government decides to lets say setup a response system like that, it will use a designated frequencies...just like how GPS has it's own frequency so it can be regulated.  Then guess what, those iPhone 14's won't work with that system and depending on the deal with GlobalStar Apple might still be stuck paying for that 85% of bandwidth.

So the government will be unable to use designated as well as Globestar frequency together? Is that what you are implying? Why the fuck would government make their own system when private players have already made the system (especially a system with a lot of capital). Do you not also know any economics?

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

In the SEC filing it makes it quite clear that Apple will pretty much need to eventually charge for the service.  They are responsible for 95% of all new satellites launched cost.  They reserve 85% of the bandwidth, GlobalStar is literally abandoning $175 million in assets with this deal.  Based on their 2023 numbers, it implies they expect to gain about $85 - $100 million just in 2023 and more in later years.  So again, without competition Apple will definitely start charging for the feature (even if it is bundled up in a subscription of something else)

Exactly the fucking point. 2 years is them bleeding money hoping for some open protocol supported by the government to eventually popup. 

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

It was literally stated that it is going to be offered as a free service to T-Mobile customers.  Also for satellite internet, Starlink is crazily affordable for what you get.  For Starlink the additional satellite cost is likely almost nothing as the hardware already would exist on the satellite and they have to launch the sat anyways, and they are making the bulk of the payment for those sat. not by this but rather by commercial clients (cruise ships, airlines) [which they get $5000/month] and then starlink customers.  T-Mobile is just like getting free funding.  On T-Mobiles side of things, they get the benefit of being able to say if you are with T-Mobile you get this added feature which other carriers don't have...and so they get the subscribers money.  Essentially it's a customer retention and attraction scheme...the added cost is outweighed by additional clients they get.  They also benefit when other carriers "offer" the feature through t-mobile (so they get the extra fees there)

There's no such thing as free lunch. Whatever Musk and starlink says can't be treated as actual facts of the matter today. Especially as I mentioned before Starlink v2 is nowhere near ready, nor Starship which v2 depends on.

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

The tl;dr; it's not too much of an added cost for Starlink to include this eventually and for T-Mobile they benefit from getting extra press, customers, etc.  By offering it free T-Mobile stands to make more money essentially.

Why T-mobile? Did you ever stop to think. If it was free, they could've done it for all. T-Mobile mustve agreed to pay huge sums of money and they will find a way to get that back from customers

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

They are a lot closer than you would think, the biggest difference is likely a directional antenna for signalling on the phone and the frequency they operate.  Software wise though they likely work quite similar.  They both have to compensate for the speed of the satellite and have a different signalling...but that's a software driven then.

Starlink is from satellite side of things. It will emit 5G and try to emulate a cell tower. Its so far a theoretical concept, so execution remains to be seen on how good and relaibel it will actually be.

 

Apple's implementation is the opposite. Its the phone that has the high gain antenna trying to communicate with a regular satellite. Given the size constraints Apple had to work with, both are entirely different technologies

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Back to being illiterate I see in terms of what I have been saying.  The simple fact is I'm bringing up Starlink, I'm bringing up Mate 50 because of the simple fact to show that Apple isn't the one that is making it a standard.  You act as though Apple is the one who is leading the charge and that Apple is the one that's changing the minds of the politicians for these features.

Apple is leading the charge because their features is already here. Unlike Starlink which is something that is slated to happen sometime in the next decade

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

The simple fact is Apple isn't doing anything special with this SOS feature, there has been a bunch of companies that have been working towards this for years (and others that are trying to get it working within the 5G spectrum as well..waiting for FCC approval).

You still don't get the concept of what is available to use now and what is not available to use right?

23 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

You wanted quotes, here are your quotes of giving Apple the credit, when there are a bunch of alternatives that have been in the works.  Apple doesn't deserve the credit for making this a standard feature.  It has been announced by t-mobile/starlink, Android is adding it, Huawei literally has a phone out that allows an SOS texting.  So stop making Apple out to be the hero....trying to

Did I ever say that I dont give Apple credit? Do you not understand English?

Quote

What 'responses'? Can you literally quote me anything or find any substantial evidence for anything you say apart from your assumptions and opinions. Time and time again I have given you the same. Elon's tweet literally says Apple engineers know what they're doing and they're working together on it.

This is what I quoted, and it had nothing to do with me rather show the 'responses' that you are commenting about that shows that Apple wasn't doing anything new? Your orignal quote quoted below

 

On 9/16/2022 at 11:23 AM, wanderingfool2 said:

The responses are to say that there isn't any "special" about Apple doing it.  People who keep saying things like Apple is making this the standard or that Apple is the one pushing the industry on this, or other similar.  Of course hardware dedicated is better, but the basic functionality will still work with cells that don't have it...here's the thing, most people don't switch their phones ever few years.  Starlink is brought up because it shows that Apple isn't isolated in working on this, and that this push isn't just an Apple thing.

 

[AnonymousGuy]

14 Pro Max in hand:  it's not that different from the outgoing 12 Pro Max I'm replacing.  Slightly larger screen via the body ratio % increasing, slightly smoother with the 120hz.  Camera does seem crispier in low light. 

 

It is nice though that FaceID finally works when the phone is in landscape.  I'm not sure if that was implemented on the 13 but I know the iPad already had this.

 

The SOS thing isn't until November.

 

Always on screen has no customization.  Can't change the brightness, the wallpaper, the widgets, etc.  It is kinda cool though being able to see notifications now without tapping the screen to turn it on.

 

If I wasn't basically getting a "free" upgrade I wouldn't bother.

[saltycaramel]

(Landscape FaceID was introduced by iOS16 on the 13 as well.)

[vetali]

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/iphone-14-pro-cameras-vibrating.2359556/

 

14 pro cameras are vibrating mostly using 3rd party apps and in some cases physically damaging themselves causing reduced quality images. Seen multiple threads on it, usually tiktok, snapchat, and banking apps causing the issue. No issues personally so far.

[Rauten]

On 9/16/2022 at 2:54 PM, Commodus said:

The funny thing is that it's arguably the smallest new feature for any phone — it's nice, but it really isn't going to be the make-or-break factor that leads you to pick an iPhone 14 Pro or Mate 50 over, say, a Galaxy S22 or Xiaomi 12.

This, this is my readout of the whole thing.

 

It's a fringe use-case that will be used by a very, very, very, very small section of their userbase.

And yet, because they have basically nothing else this year, it's been marketed up the effin' wazzoo. They know they have basically nothing new, so they're drummed this tiny thing to make it look like the second coming of Christ.

 

I'm not disputing the fact that it's a feature. I'm not disputing the fact that, for the very few that will use it, it will be great.

 

But the utterly insane marketing they did on it in the presentation speaks volumes about the rest of the phone, more than this feature itself.

 

And given how both Apple and Google are now talking about satellite connectivity, the whole thing feels to me like it's going to be the new phone arms race. They're both probably reaching the limit of finagling they can do with the cameras, and so, satellite connectivity is the newly chosen field of battle; even if it's of marginal use to most customers.

Because it's no longer about providing interesting features or meaningful upgrades; it's about one-upping the other's marketing and claims, even if it's in the most asinine and pointless ways possible.

 

Apple are just the ones firing the first salvo. Samsung and Google will most likely, unfortunately, follow.

[Commodus]

3 hours ago, Rauten said:

This, this is my readout of the whole thing.

 

It's a fringe use-case that will be used by a very, very, very, very small section of their userbase.

And yet, because they have basically nothing else this year, it's been marketed up the effin' wazzoo. They know they have basically nothing new, so they're drummed this tiny thing to make it look like the second coming of Christ.

 

I'm not disputing the fact that it's a feature. I'm not disputing the fact that, for the very few that will use it, it will be great.

 

But the utterly insane marketing they did on it in the presentation speaks volumes about the rest of the phone, more than this feature itself.

 

And given how both Apple and Google are now talking about satellite connectivity, the whole thing feels to me like it's going to be the new phone arms race. They're both probably reaching the limit of finagling they can do with the cameras, and so, satellite connectivity is the newly chosen field of battle; even if it's of marginal use to most customers.

Because it's no longer about providing interesting features or meaningful upgrades; it's about one-upping the other's marketing and claims, even if it's in the most asinine and pointless ways possible.

 

Apple are just the ones firing the first salvo. Samsung and Google will most likely, unfortunately, follow.

The way I've heard it: like crash detection, satellite SOS is a feature you hope you'll never have to use.

 

With that said... Apple didn't devote that much attention to satellite connectivity, and I don't think it'll be much of a battleground short of having full two-way internet connectivity. Touting it as a feature is an admission that smartphone development is plateauing, to a degree, but I don't know that the industry has suddenly run out of ideas. As it stands, Apple clearly had more to offer with the iPhone 14 Pro than this (a great AOD implementation, the "Dynamic Island," the A16 and the like).

 

My hunch is that Google, Samsung and others will add emergency satellite access either this year or next and mention it during their events, but that it'll amount to another bullet point item.

[wanderingfool2]

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

So, you basically admitted that they will have to charge for it because it actually costs real money to maintain (not for nickel and diming). That's exactly the point I was trying to make.

 

Then what about 2 years of free? It is definitely not to get people to upgrade their phones. Because that wouldn't make any sense and that wouldn't work. Rather its a stop gate temporary solution for the rest of the market to catchup and make these things a standard free of charge feature. 

You were the one who foolishly was saying that Apple was going to offer it "free" and that it will be regulated for it to be free.  I stated they won't be able to, and you go on about how I am making unfounded assumptions.  I am merely pointing out that the way they are setting it up, it is in no way free.

 

The simple fact is this, I am only arguing the fact that you keep making Apple out to be like a god that is going to be pushing regulations and making the industry standard.

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

You talk about Starlink like how Tesla solved FSD 5 years ago. An upcoming new thing, especially from Musk, should not be treated as an alternative for something we literally have today

It's not even available today, stop being so illiterate.  You talk about me assuming things, but you are the one who literally ignores anything that doesn't fit against your pro-apple viewpoint.  The feature they admit isn't going to be available until Nov.

 

The t-mobile launch already mentioned having it running the lab, btw...but you seem to glom onto the wrong point.  It's the whole concept that Apple WILL be charging for this in the future, and yet you foolishly talk about how Apple will make it a standard that the government will then make others offer free...but sure, I'm the one who is being naive (talking about a scenario where Starlink works)

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

So the government will be unable to use designated as well as Globestar frequency together? Is that what you are implying? Why the fuck would government make their own system when private players have already made the system (especially a system with a lot of capital). Do you not also know any economics?

Yes I do, you apparently have a primary-schoolers level of knowledge of business and economics though (You keep saying Globestar...without cluing in everywhere it's written GlobalStar).  They won't magically adopt the GlobalStar system, they realistically can't take over the frequency band.

 

It's a publicly traded company, where Apple has now signed up with the exclusive rights to the majority of the bandwidth; where GlobalStar owns the rights to use those frequency bands.  The government would never step in to fund something like that, where there are already contracts limiting it's use.

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

Exactly the fucking point. 2 years is them bleeding money hoping for some open protocol supported by the government to eventually popup. 

No, it's clear from the filing that they intend to make it eventually a feature they can charge for.  They aren't hoping the government steps in, because guess what.  The government steps in and the government would be using a public frequency, which isn't already sold, which would then require Apple to modify the frequency in hardware models...which means they still have to keep paying for all those people who are now reliant on the old variant (or cut them off)

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

Why T-mobile? Did you ever stop to think. If it was free, they could've done it for all. T-Mobile mustve agreed to pay huge sums of money and they will find a way to get that back from customers

Starlink doesn't own the frequency rights for cell phones, so they have to team up with a carrier who has enough spectrum to spare and would be willing to partner.  The R&D costs would be a real thing, but again T-Mobile could pay for most of that...and it's not something that you go and get all the carriers on board with.

 

In the T-Mobile front, I've already explained their economics.  They "get it back" through multiple ways, attracting more customers which are now paying a monthly cell phone bill.  If it becomes a more popular feature, they can offer it as roaming to carriers...so in that sense they make a lot of money from their competitors (as the competitors would need to now pay T-Mobile to offer that feature without the added expense). 

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

Starlink is from satellite side of things. It will emit 5G and try to emulate a cell tower. Its so far a theoretical concept, so execution remains to be seen on how good and relaibel it will actually be.

 

Apple's implementation is the opposite. Its the phone that has the high gain antenna trying to communicate with a regular satellite. Given the size constraints Apple had to work with, both are entirely different technologies

That is a very very high level look though.  They talk about there needing to be software side of support.  The big talking point is that since it's communicating on the 5G, it's can communicate like a cell tower...it doesn't mean that behind the scenes it's not doing extra stuff; io protocols and such.

 

What Apple is doing is very similar to what Starlink is doing, it's just Apple's approach is adding extra hardware on the phone side, and Starlink's approach is to beef up the sat. to be able to backwards compatible.  That isn't to say that Androids wouldn't move to having additional hardware that makes higher bandwidth possible.

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

Did I ever say that I dont give Apple credit? Do you not understand English?

You apparently don't understand English.  I clearly said that you are giving Apple too much credit.  Do you not understand my whole argument is that you are literally holding Apple up to be a god, and having blinders on that they aren't the only ones who deserve the credit.

 

On 9/17/2022 at 12:53 AM, RedRound2 said:

This is what I quoted, and it had nothing to do with me rather show the 'responses' that you are commenting about that shows that Apple wasn't doing anything new?

Literally Mate 50.  Mentioned again and again.  The fact is a product exists prior to Apple.  It's stupid to say that Apple is doing something new.  There are literally dozens of companies all moving towards this, and even one that beat Apple to the punch.  There is older technology that is roughly doing to, but just not in the same form factor.  I'm not making assumptions.

[vetali]

 

First work day on the 14 pro. Not too bad. AOD enabled too.

[RedRound2]

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

You were the one who foolishly was saying that Apple was going to offer it "free" and that it will be regulated for it to be free.  I stated they won't be able to, and you go on about how I am making unfounded assumptions.  I am merely pointing out that the way they are setting it up, it is in no way free.

It is free for 2 years. Not 1 month, not 6 months, not even 1 year.

What is the logic of offering it free for 2 years? Do you really think people will pay for Satellite SOS feature as an insurance?

 

I see you keep using the word 'foolishly' without really understanding what I keep saying. It's a damn stop gate solution.

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

The simple fact is this, I am only arguing the fact that you keep making Apple out to be like a god that is going to be pushing regulations and making the industry standard.

No Apple isn't god. But we've seen a million times before on how they push the entire industry forward in some new aspect that becomes a no brainer feature on literally all phones after 2-3 years. If anything its good for android users as well, but no lets all pretend Apple is evil, they steal money and then few years later be damn glad that your phone satellite sos feature.

 

And about parallel development, yeah literally the entire industry parallel develops a lot of new tech - but more often than not its usually Apple that implements it well and right. Doesn't mean they are 100% perfect

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

It's not even available today, stop being so illiterate.  You talk about me assuming things, but you are the one who literally ignores anything that doesn't fit against your pro-apple viewpoint.  The feature they admit isn't going to be available until Nov.

(continues to keep talking about starlink t-mobile thing as if it is a service that I can use right now).

 

November is literally a month and 10 days away. And Apple is pushing hard to launch in more countries before end of the year

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

The t-mobile launch already mentioned having it running the lab, btw...but you seem to glom onto the wrong point. 

Yes, so having it in the lab is now what we can consider 'released'. Yeah, we all have a 2000 KM range EV since new graphene-based battery tech is in lab now

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

It's the whole concept that Apple WILL be charging for this in the future, and yet you foolishly talk about how Apple will make it a standard that the government will then make others offer free...but sure, I'm the one who is being naive (talking about a scenario where Starlink works)

Apple will charge or not charge is not the point. Its apple's intention I'm talking about. They will have to charge because it is a very expensive service they are offering. And tbh its not really feasible to even offer it as feature when only a few hundreds of people will ever pay for it (the seasoned mountaineers, forest campers, etc.)

 

I have said this so many times now - but here it goes again. Since Apple has implemented this - others will follow. There will be a common standard established. And then it can be used as defacto "emergency" use. Basically, all of GlobeStar satellites might be repurposed for this - effectively buying them out

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Yes I do, you apparently have a primary-schoolers level of knowledge of business and economics though (You keep saying Globestar...without cluing in everywhere it's written GlobalStar).  They won't magically adopt the GlobalStar system, they realistically can't take over the frequency band.

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

It's a publicly traded company, where Apple has now signed up with the exclusive rights to the majority of the bandwidth; where GlobalStar owns the rights to use those frequency bands.  The government would never step in to fund something like that, where there are already contracts limiting it's use.

Umm no the government can't snatch it away. But they can buy it out because they have satellites with those frequencies in this place

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

No, it's clear from the filing that they intend to make it eventually a feature they can charge for.  They aren't hoping the government steps in, because guess what.  The government steps in and the government would be using a public frequency, which isn't already sold, which would then require Apple to modify the frequency in hardware models...which means they still have to keep paying for all those people who are now reliant on the old variant (or cut them off)

Oh so, so you mean instead of licensing/buying out Globestar network, they will want to use public frequency, hence they are going to contract some company to make 100s of satellite for millions of dollars, and then launch them into space for billions of dollars and then give it as free community service for the rest of the world. Sure, thing man

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Starlink doesn't own the frequency rights for cell phones, so they have to team up with a carrier who has enough spectrum to spare and would be willing to partner.  The R&D costs would be a real thing, but again T-Mobile could pay for most of that...and it's not something that you go and get all the carriers on board with.

Yup carriers will have to stay from satellite services /s

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

That is a very very high level look though.  They talk about there needing to be software side of support.  The big talking point is that since it's communicating on the 5G, it's can communicate like a cell tower...it doesn't mean that behind the scenes it's not doing extra stuff; io protocols and such.

Again, very theoretical. There are many places with unreliable 4G/5G despite having a tower in the area. I don't think the performance or reliability will be upto par as you think. A possible solution is from both sides - that is a capable satellite and phone with capable hardware. 

 

This solution sounds more like Linus trying to beam WiFi multiple KMs away - but with no receiver and just hoping that your phone sees the signal at the receiving end

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

What Apple is doing is very similar to what Starlink is doing, it's just Apple's approach is adding extra hardware on the phone side, and Starlink's approach is to beef up the sat. to be able to backwards compatible.  That isn't to say that Androids wouldn't move to having additional hardware that makes higher bandwidth possible.

One concept is not even proven properly in the real world. If you want anything usable with value addition, it needs to be both (that's just basic EM waves)

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

You apparently don't understand English.  I clearly said that you are giving Apple too much credit.  Do you not understand my whole argument is that you are literally holding Apple up to be a god, and having blinders on that they aren't the only ones who deserve the credit.

I already repeated this point earlier. They are not gods, I have problems with some stuff Apple does. For example, I hate how they have started differentiating their base and Pros lineups YoY. Previously a well capable of iPhone couldve been had for 699 and 799 but now those lines lack a lot of features effectively turning the real price of the iPhone 999+.

 

But something things they do really well. They have done many things in the past (displays, biometrics, haptics, software, TWS, cameras, etc) that have pushed the industry forward in meaningful ways. Have other companies not done it. Obviously not - pixels pushed computational photography and Samsung is the clear leader in foldables. But Apple has also done so much, and this is yet another thing. It is going to be arms race for satellite connectivity in next few years and we will have some real useful features in 4-5 years' time. That's what I'm crediting Apple for.

 

Also, your T-mobile star link, that is slated to happen sometime in next decade is, nonsense is US limited as well. And US isnt the only country that exists in the world

7 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Literally Mate 50.  Mentioned again and again.  The fact is a product exists prior to Apple.  It's stupid to say that Apple is doing something new.  There are literally dozens of companies all moving towards this, and even one that beat Apple to the punch.  There is older technology that is roughly doing to, but just not in the same form factor.  I'm not making assumptions.

Mate 50 connects to Beidou satellites which is China only and as someone else mentioned, its a one-way communication. It was literally announced 1 day before - which was a clear attempt to just get ahead of the press. I'm sad that you actually think these are things and 'lab results' that constitutes as the product release. Just imagine how far Apple has managed to go in their labs to you know actually release this feature to millions of phones for public?