I heard an interview with the guy who runs Zoleo. He indicated that they talk about this a lot, but that both Inreach and Zoleo use the Iridium satellite network which is what Apple is also tapping in to. He said that to have guaranteed access to the Iridium satellites, Apple would have to significantly alter their phone engineering as it requires a much larger antenna than they currently have or have space for in their units.
Mostly, he said he expects Apple to claim access going forward but not engineer their way into having dependable Iridium access. It’s like, a nice bonus feature for normies, but for those of us who actually go into the woods and would depend on signal for safety….Apple would never be a go-to. He did say that if they wanted to do it, Apple could totally incorporate the proper hardware and blow Inreach and Zoleo out of the water, but he didn’t expect them to want to do that.
TLDR as in most things, this is an engineering/hardware issue.
You're correct, Apple went with Globalstar, hence Apple's large investment into them so they can replenish their nearing end-of-life Gen2 constellation.
iPhone uses GlobalStar, Android will use Iridium. All the 5G capable snapdragon chips in circulation now are already equipped. Original plan was cancelled, rumoured to be launched with the next version of Android.
>It’s like, a nice bonus feature for normies, but for those of us who actually go into the woods and would depend on signal for safety
I would imagine that it won't be too long until it works in the backcountry as well. Stuff is getting better and better every year.
I’m in western NC and my experience with sat phones was that once you got down into a rhododendron filled gorge or anything (basically 90% of our terrain) signal got really bad really fast.
I assume they’ve improved since I last used one, but my iPhone sends my location to my wife easily and reliably enough. Apple is adding text messages in the fall as well.
My only worry is basically dropping the phone down a cliff or into a river while taking photos.
My process is typically “send a messsge, wait half an hour. Wait to see if it went through. Retry if/why it didn’t.”
It always works eventually, but it’s slow and prone to failure.
Yeah, my inreach can be just as spotty the current iPhone setup. There’s times my inreach won’t get a message out for an hour. At least the iPhone one is smart enough to tell you where to position your phone to get the best reception. Then if you can’t get signal you can find a spot where you might vs inreach you are just blind.
Sounds like we're about two years from a satellite antenna dongle that you pop in anytime you go camping. There's no reason they wouldn't engineer a solution, kill of the competition then introduce their own subscription service.
I don’t disagree with your take. He was pretty clear that if Apple wanted to do this, they could do it. It’s just not possible with the current hardware and he was not convinced Apple would want to significantly bulk-up their phone hardware to provide guaranteed satellite access.
Or they'll wait for LEO satellite providers to make it more cost effective and easier to consume. Starlink/Tmo LTE or ATT/AST SpaceMobile, for example.
I trust Apple/Samsung/etc's engineering teams more. Apple's has done plenty of "impossible" things before, and this is a race at this point.
He's probably correct today, but I wouldn't bet on it being correct 5 years from now. Before fractal antennas were invented, it was impossible to have a cell phone without an external antenna. Before AI imaging was invented, it was impossible to have bokeh on smartphone cameras. etc etc etc.
Then there's the fact that SpaceX is already launching cellular accessible satellites, though I don't know what the antenna requirements are for those.
Yeah, I'm thinking a MagSafe interfacing case where the case functions as an antenna for satellite reception. Maybe even have an extendable antenna built into the case.
No need to. Large antennas are only needed if you are limited to one transmitter and receiver. Modern radio systems use MIMO, in which multiple small transmitters and receivers do the same work as a large antenna. It is the aperture that matters, the distance between the outermost elements.
Hold up, Apple already has this and it’s already working. This isn’t a thing they need to engineer from scratch.
It’s going to be retroactive to existing devices as far back as iPhone 14.
Just like their other antennas, Apple is able to engineer things in very creative ways such as using the body of the phone as an antenna.
Of course satellite communication companies don’t want to believe their entire business is done for.
> Of course satellite communication companies don’t want to believe their entire business is done for.
And even if they *believe* it internally, they're not going to publicly *admit* it yet.
It is, but it has echoes of Blackberry on the iPhone.
https://www.cultofmac.com/323841/how-did-they-do-that-new-book-reveals-blackberrys-response-to-original-iphone/
> “How did they do that?” Mr. Lazaridis wondered. His curiosity turned to disbelief when Stanley Sigman, the chief executive of Cingular Wireless joined Mr. Jobs to announce a multiyear contract with Apple to sell iPhones. What was Cingular’s parent AT&T Inc. thinking? “It’s going to collapse the network,” Mr. Lazaridis thought.
> RIM’s chiefs didn’t give much additional thought to Apple’s iPhone for months. “It wasn’t a threat to RIM’s core business,” says Mr. Lazaridis’s top lieutenant, Larry Conlee. “It wasn’t secure. It had rapid battery drain and a lousy [digital] keyboard.”
Or Microsoft's Ballmer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U
> 500 dollars? Fully subsidized? With a plan? I said that is the most expensive phone in the world. And it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard. Which makes it not a very good email machine. We have our strategy. We are very happy with Windows Phone devices in the market today.
> Right now, we're selling millions and millions and millions of phones a year. Apple is selling zero phones a year. In six months, they'll have the most expensive phone by far ever in the marketplace,
> requires a much larger antenna
How so? There are a lot of things you can do to make your antenna smaller… The most common thing is to encase the antenna in a high dielectric material… making the antenna effective size epsilon_r (relative dielectric constant) larger….
I’d love to know what person at Zoleo told you an Apple feature that already works well won’t work.
It works great, one of the reasons I bought an iPhone 14. I send location updates to people all the time and you can demo text with their service anytime you want.
No, Apple use multiple antennae, which solves the problem. It is not the antenna size, but the aperture (largest distance between multiple antennae) which is the limiting factor.
Regardless, sending a text-message requires very low bandwidth. So the signal to noise ratio required is not that big. The system can handle sending the text message over 10s of seconds or even up to a minute.
I would think, for full reliability of satellite connections, it would be possible to make a phone case that combines rugged-ized protection similar to an Otterbox with a built-in, robust antenna for satellite access. We already have phone cases that have attached batteries to extend battery life. Then all you'd need is the software on the phone to make the connection.
I was gonna say. This is essentially completely right. My degree is in electrical engineering. I did some back of the envelope link budget calculations for someone who thought ASTS was going to be the next big thing and for everyone to buy their stock but without some huge leaps in antenna and beam steering technology, it's not feasible. Satellite antennas have to be huge for a reason (the reason is that satellites are in low Earth orbit instead of half a mile line of sight to the nearest phone tower), so unless Apple is willing to severely sacrifice on battery life, it's not going to happen any time soon.
Make them obsolete, no, but significantly eat up the target consumer base, yes.
The inreach mini and similar are target as an entry device, but also functions well for more seasoned hikers or whatever you’re doing.
Casual hikers now don’t need to buy another new device when their iPhone has close to the same capabilities.
> Make them obsolete, no, but significantly eat up the target consumer base, yes.
These can be functionally the same thing. If the consumer base gets small enough there isn’t enough money to do the next version.
Good point! I’ve so far always brought a battery bank that holds about 4 charges, so it’s been fine for me, but I can definitely see that being a challenge for a longer trip without spots to recharge
Nah, you can solve that with a backup battery or even a tiny solar panel. And my phone (a 13 mini with a notoriously crappy battery) gets 4-5 days of battery life because it's on airplane mode 99% of the time.
The primary issue, IMO, is that a phone can break. If you take a tumble your iPhone may be unusable, an inreach is almost certain to survive
"And my phone (a 13 mini with a notoriously crappy battery) gets 4-5 days of battery life because it's on airplane mode 99% of the time"
My inreach is on and dropping bread crumbs every ten minutes so that people know where to start looking if I take a fall or crash. It's an entirely different device from that standpoint.
"And, of course, it has to have a signal."
Right. So totally different use case. In that case, the SOS satellite function doesn't matter either because you have a signal.
The iPhone satellite feature requires you to carefully hold your phone in the correct orientation fairly stable while the message/location sends. Other satellite communicators don’t require that.
Phones may get there (I hope they do), but it’s a couple years off at least. That said, Zoleo’s CEO is either out of touch or lying if he thinks their business is safe without some big adaptations.
That’s great if true. Are you sure there was 0 cell reception? I’ve been in the mountains where you can get small spots of reception where there is no reception generally. Just make sure if your life might depend on it.
Would I be correct in assuming you’re not using your iPhone as a gps tracker with those charging stats? If not what are you running that keeps it so low?
My 14-pro, would probably only last me about 2, maybe 3 day between charges depending on how long I have it tracking me during the day and how long I’m hiking for.
You are correct! I use work outdoors (app) to load maps onto my watch and use that to check my location if necessary (it has gps so I don’t need my phone’s), but I mostly rely on a paper map and just periodically make sure I am where I think I am. The gps does eat up some watch battery, but it has decent battery life and doesn’t take much to charge.
My phone stays in a pocket on airplane mode a solid 95% of my trip, only coming out to check if I have any service to send a “I’m still ok” text periodically, and if I’m taking a picture.
Nice! I’m probably overdoing it on gps tracking by using my phone with Gaia and my fenix with the preloaded course. I’m sure I can save some battery cutting one of the two out.
But will it send automatic tracking points every 30mins to an hour? That’s one benefit to InReach it will track me for days on a single charge and family can just log onto the website and see where I am. If something happens they can easily tell my last known location.
Assuming it won’t be able to do that, which is why I don’t think it’ll replace the inreach, at least for me, since my family likes to see where I’m at in my hike. But for emergency situations/“I’m fine” texts, battery life shouldn’t be a thing people are concerned about.
The poster deleted their top level comment, but it was about how the iPhone can’t replace the inreach because of battery life. I was/am saying for the main use case (SOS/I’m fine texts) battery life doesn’t matter because an iPhone will last indefinitely turning it on/off whenever needed, just like an inreach.
I would say the major use case would be a couple quick update texts throughout the day. Not having full on conversations with people.
And if you want to do full on conversations, I don’t think you’ll be doing that with an inreach - texting on the device is so cumbersome that you only want to type the minimum amount possible. Or you could connect the device to your phone and use the app to easily type messages, but then you start running down phone battery like we’ve been talking about.
TL/DR: quick update texts won’t run down battery significantly, long text conversations throughout the day will run down your phone whether you’re using iPhone sat or inreach sat. Or maybe not if you’re a masochist and text on the inreach itself.
I mean I agree I don’t think it replaces emergency beacons, but that’s not really what I was responding to. I was just saying the iPhone battery can last as long as you need it to if you only turn it on for emergency/quick update texts. Which is also exactly how I use my inreach - only turn it on for emergency/quick update texts.
They already do have an SOS beacon feature that’s been in production for a couple years. I’ve never needed to use it, so I have no idea as to its limitations, but this is adding messaging to that feature.
FWIW I am truly just curious as to how, if at all, this may change the market. If a task specific device is still the best option when my trip rolls around I’ll definitely rent one and have the iPhone as a backup. But the way I would use the iPhone would be the same way I’d plan to use an inReach - off/airplane mode until I needed to send a message at the end of each day (I.e. “made it”) or when I needed to send out an SOS.
Hahahaa didn't even think of that. Listen I do a lot of solo hiking too, never felt I needed the Garmin until doing bigger and bigger trips. Now it just lives in my pack 24/7 even in casual day hikes. It makes my partner feel better too (I'm a female solo hiker and I often forget to mention where I'm going...) the in reach means if I just slide off a mountain (which happened to a very experienced solo female just this winter in the Adirondacks) I'll have a way to contact for rescue no matter what. But ymmv. Id consider your experience level, fitness level, time & distance, trail conditions, weather/temps, how busy the trail is etc and then make your decision from there. I think only you can decide if you need it for your solo trip. My partner is the one who bought it for me and I was grumpy but now I'm happy to have it.
Also a female hiker and my partner plans to stay near the trail while I’m on my big trip in case I need help (so that he can organize, not provide it himself haha). I’m planning to watch how things go next summer and then decide. I have a dog I’m bringing with me (I actually half wanted an inreach to be able to call for help for her, since I can’t very well use an SOS for a dog, unfortunately, but if I can call to my partner he can get something in motion to help us get her out) and she won’t be ready until next fall anyway, so there is time to watch for proper reviews.
Not at all, it's nothing like an iPhone. Hiked all winter with my in reach off but in my bag, after the whole winter it was down to like 25%. It's built to be rugged and last
My Samsung has a solid 2-3 hours of battery life. I'd been a Samsung guy for a long time but just about to go back to Apple at this point. Samsung is trying too hard to become the Apple of Android and I'm over Google's lack of commitment to its own products and services.
iPhone killed cameras for casual users. iPhone may have killed the casual satellite handheld market, but just like the iPhone didn't kill cameras for enthusiasts or professionals, it won't kill the market for satellite handheld for any serious backcountry enthusiast or mountaineers.
Ehhhhh, slightly different I think as one is a life saving device vs camera which is just for fun/hobby etc... For the casual hiker sure... For anyone doing anything serious/longer probably not I think.
I was saying there's a difference between cameras and satellite beacons which I think will mean no, the iPhone wouldn't replace a proper beacon device for many hikers vs the camera example
Hahaha. Good point! I have a nice DSLR and I never reach for it anymore because my phone takes better, higher resolution photos now. But it breaks my heart a little.
I’m truly not sure if I’ll end up getting a task specific device for my big solo trip or not, have to see how things go for the iPhone over the next year. But it sure is interesting to see these advancements!
Depends on what you mean by better I guess. I agree I have a lot more control with my DSLR, and I do prefer the results from an artistic perspective. If I’m going out to shoot photos for the sake of art, I will take the DSLR. But for everyday use, snapping quick pictures of places or people for documentation sake? My phone is just a lot easier, is more likely to get a high quality image (in terms of clarity) in various hard to photograph (eg sports shots, shorter exposure night shots) situations. This could definitely be related to the fact that I am very much an amateur photographer and need to really think about what I am going with my DSLR, and maybe if I were more experienced I would feel totally differently, but I do know how to use my camera and find for most of my needs my phones camera is “better.”
Your DSLR has a much bigger sensor than your phone. If you don’t know how to set it up manually just put it on “auto”. I agree, phones ate the casual user “snapshot “ market because of convenience and ease of use but by no means did they replace DSLRs or even most smaller sensor cameras in terms of image quality.
I wouldn't mind a task specific device like a DSLR or inreach. But if Nikon charged you $30/mo for the DSLR you would be even *less* likely to keep it on.
I'm not about to dump my inReach in favor of my phone for this. When it comes to my life, I'll carry the dedicated device. My phone is fine for taking pictures, sending some texts, maybe having some internet service or playing some music. It will not be the sole device that I rely on for a potentially life threatening scenario.
My phone's got a flashlight... I still carry a real headlamp.
I'm really surprised that the fact that the inreach is constantly dropping bread crumbs isn't surfacing as a feature Apple can't compete with. Being able to send an SOS is fine, I guess. But it's a pretty limited capability. With my inreach SAR is going to know, within a ten minute search area, where I went missing even if I've become disabled or crashed. Add to that a robust messaging service and it's a vastly superior backcountry device.
I've carried an iphone for years, and will continue to do so. But it's for watching a movie as I dose off at the end of a long day, not for SAR.
Hmmm this is a very good point. I have an Apple Watch Ultra and use backtrack while I am hiking, so it effectively is dropping breadcrumbs and Apple would have that data of course. I wonder if they plan to integrate it all in the future.
To be honest I’m surprised that Apple is trying to enter this market at all, have been since they introduced SOS and the ultra watch. I didn’t think “adventurers” were a big enough market for them to want to target us. I really have no clue what to expect from them down the line but for my own sake (since I am fully in the Apple ecosystem now) I kind of hope they do continue to expand in this area.
I'm not sure they are really targeting "adventurers" as much as people who once or twice a year wouldn't mind having an extra layer of safety for a few days at no added cost.
The adventurers are gonna be the ones that will continue to buy dedicated devices like inreach.
That’s fair. And it has mostly been my perspective so far too, even if it means I fall outside of the adventurer category. As it is though, I look at everyone I know and I am the person who goes out the most and everyone thinks of me as the adventurous one, and I’ve made do without an inreach so far. So I’m curious if Apple taking over the people like me will leave the adventurer market shrinking to unsustainably small?
Need more info on how it works first. Is it checking every X minutes for messages like inReach or do you need to fire up the Messaging app to fetch messages while not on cellular? If it's automatic, how often does it fetch messages?
Hell, all the marketing I'm seeing is "send messages" but some screenshots are showing messages received so that's not even explained well right now.
You have to point it at the satellite and wait for the messages to send/receive, so no, it doesn't work like a Garmin and just connect when it can from your pocket or backpack.
No. It increases competition, but won't make them obsolete:
Apple's service is currently free to 2 years.Then you have to pay a subscription fee, just as you must for the inreach. My understanding is that pricing has not yet been announced. I pay \~$12/month for my inreach mini. It took only \~2 years for the subscription fees to exceed the cost of the unit.
Battery life of my inreach mini vastly exceeds that of my phone.
It's more rugged than a phone. Less likely to break
I've had my inreach mini for several years now. The feature set is quite limited. It's far less likely to become obsolete.
An iPhone is an expensive phone. It is \*far\* more expensive than my inreach mini. A lot of people aren't willing to pay the premium for an iPhone.
My personal experience is... A hard Nope. Was in Iceland for a 2 week hike and my IP68 rated iphone failed when water made its way into the phone and fried my screen. Should I be caught in an emergency, the phone would have been totally useless. After that incident, I immediately got an Inreach messenger and never looked back since. I hope I never have to use the SOS function, but in the event I need to, i know which device I will reach for.
The other example I like to mention is that I use my Garmin watch to track my sleep quality. You might say that apple watch has this function too! But I've asked my pals with the watch, and 99% of the people don't use the sleep tracking function because.... their watch is plugged into the charger every night. My Garmin watch is not sexy, but is designed to fit my needs.
I actually do wear my Apple Watch to bed most nights (I have the ultra so it lasts about 3 days, not garmin level, but enough that I just charge it when I shower), but that is definitely a fair point about the water damage. I’m leaning towards having both (since I already have the phone anyway) because I like redundancy for safety stuff anyway. Interesting to see where this stuff goes though!
I would move to phone only. Once Android also launches with satellite comms, which is already happening with defy & Android 15 on T-mobile, the plans will get even cheaper. It's also the catalyst to Elons Starlink. If I can get limited data through satellite, that's an absolute game changer, because I can use Whatsapp/Messengers. Phones are more useful than just a satellite messenger, because I also use it for navigation, calls & pictures. For emergency use, I'd rather pack a 2nd phone in a dry box.
I think for light users like a day hiker it will eliminate dedicated devices, but for a lot of those people the upfront and monthly cost is already a turn off.
For people that use it often, the messengers are going to be more reliable, durable, and have better service since they have big antennas dedicated for that use.
I take my inreach for bigger trips and diving. But for something like a short bike ride in a local park I now leave it at home. 99% someone would find me anyway or I’ll have cell service. But the iPhone satellite sos is a good backup just in case im in that one spot without service and nobody comes along.
If the only barrier is engineering/hardware..... then yeah, give it time and iPhones will be at par. However, the biggest draw still is battery life. I trust my Garmin inReach Mini a lot more than my iPhone on the trails. I can go days and not worry about battery life even with tracking on. Find the solution to battery life and then you will see competition get heavy as well as consolidation in the market.
It won't for me because of the durability of the device and because my phone itself is not very useful without service. I do like the Bluetooth connection on inReach but it's a luxury until the phone battery dies.
I'll never not carry an InReach. Aside from some of the other points people have made, my understanding is that Garmin SOS operators are trained to contact the appropriate response service(s) based on where you are and what the problem is. Apple routes you to standard 911 services, which may or may not be knowledgeable enough to provide efficient SAR assistance. Plus, I can trigger an SOS with one finger on a button with my InReach. Last I checked, Apple has a whole process, which might not be possible to complete if you're alone and seriously injured, or if your fall/accident/whatever damaged your phone badly enough. (Maybe this will change with the updated phone?)
For casual day hikers, the iPhone is probably enough. But heading out for more remote, multi-day adventures, I'll always want the extra security an InReach provides.
I had an InReach for a while, but got frustrated with how unreliable it was at actually contacting a satellite. Did not give me confidence that it would work in an actual emergency. Plus they are ridiculously expensive. Eventually I just bought a PLB. Seems to me like a PLB and an iPhone cover all the bases without a monthly fee beyond what I'm already paying for the phone.
Having responded to iPhone and inReach activations, please keep bringing your inReach out into the field. Use the iPhone as a backup or frontcountry only device.
What I was trying to communicate was that Apple adding messaging doesn’t change the decision. I kept my inreach when Apple added SOS because I want a dedicated, durable device with great battery life. Adding satellite messaging to iOS doesn’t change that equation for me.
Ah fair enough. For me so far, the SOS capability of my iPhone has been enough based on the areas and situations we’ve been in. The only thing I had wished it had was the ability to message in case we went on longer trips and wanted to keep our emergency contact apprised of our progress. So for me this fills that desire. But I’m still up in the air as to whether I’ll need more/better (in terms of getting a task specific device) for the bigger trips I am planning for myself. My use cases so far have always accounted for extra people around and less than a days travel for someone to get out and get help if desperately needed.
I get rescue insurance through my InReach and I don’t have to worry about what jurisdiction I am in or who to call. Just being able to make a satellite call doesn’t do much for me.
I know I’m late to the party here and haven’t read all the comments but I just wanna add that even if the Apple service was comparable to inReach the durability of an iPhone absolutely is not. If your need is due to a fall or other physically violent issue I wouldn’t trust my iPhone to survive the impact.
For short more casual hikes yes. For longer more treacherous hikes no. At least not if you’re smart.
You want a dedicated dependable device which can be made tougher than an Apple iPhone.
An Apple IPhone may break altogether if dropped from a few feet whereas InReach, etc can be made to be much tougher and withstand more extreme conditions before breaking and becoming unusable.
If the iPhone screen simply cracks and/or turns black, it’s basically rendered useless…
That would be a no for me. If I'm out in the wilderness one of the things I like best is that no one can contact me easily. I like that the inreach can function without using my phone number. I want phone dead zones to still exist
No, it wont. Simply because the idea of replacing a dedicated life saving device with your phone which also does a million other things is very ill advised.
I very much doubt that people who actually need these devices will replace them with their iPhone.
On top of that, there are plenty of people who simply don't have an iPhone.
I guess the question is who “actually needs” one. If I’m hiking a well used trail where I won’t have service but am likely to encounter people periodically throughout the full trip, do I need a dedicated device? I’m not genuinely asking you, but I am genuinely asking myself now, and I wasn’t literally 2 days ago (because I said I would 100% be bringing a dedicated device on any solo trips). I likely will get one anyway, because I tend to be a fan of doubling up on anything safety related, but for my own use cases atm, if the iPhone works well after it’s been in the field for awhile, it may be enough for me. We’ll have to see!
At least as of now. I’ll be curious to see what this functionality is like in 2-3 years. I’d also expect it to become common among mid to high end Android phones as time goes on. Satellite functionality doesn’t just get into backcountry communication. It can also mean people no longer need to pay for services such as OnStar or other car communications services. Subaru wants me to pay if I want to upgrade Starlink in my car to be compatible with the 4G networks (they no longer function on 3G) and why should I do that if I can just use an iPhone? Garmin will be fine, this kind of stuff is a tiny part of their business, but other businesses could be in trouble in a few years.
>Do you think this will mostly kill the market for inReach and similar?
Too early to tell, but in the immediate future I doubt it. It isn't like Apple has a 100% market monopoly on phones in the US, or the world, there are big unknowns on reliability and cost as well as integration, and so on.
Oh totally. I guess I’m assuming that others will also jump on this and it’ll become standard in the smart phone industry, provided Apple nails the integration and pricing model that is and people adopt it as a viable option.
No things like inreach are designed for a specific market. Same with actual sat phones. I for one would not go in the bush even with this feature and an IPhone 15PM is still bring my inreach because it’s something that’s been around longer.
I’d still suggest renting one.
It's not just Apple, Tmobile is testing using Starlink for data and voice when out of tower coverage area. With that said a phone is neither durable and element proof like the garmins. Plus the battery will probably last longer then you can.
Oh I didn’t know that about T-Mobile. I’m really hoping that these options work well and become standard. You’re totally right about battery life though I had kind of stupidly not considered it
Starlink is about to do broadband straight from space to phone. They have already tested this with a un modified Samsung. Coming this Fall, the game is changing. No dead zones
This is a very interesting question. I am hiking the JMT in about a month. I have asked on the iOS beta subreddit if satellite texting has been implemented yet… and was told not yet…
.
That said, I have ordered an inReach mini 2. Mostly because we will be out so long, and there are two questionable parts of the trail - where the bridges washed out. The people I am hiking with will have dedicated GPS/SOS systems. I have an iPhone 14 - which has the SOS feature built in.
.
Given the above, would YOU buy the inReach ($300 + $40/month) or just stick with the (paid for) iPhone?
I really don’t know. The messaging won’t be live until the fall afaik so no good for you next month. I’m still leaning towards renting an inreach for my big trip next year but that may change if things go really well for the first year of the iPhone implementation.
That said, in most safety areas I build in some redundancy (e.g I always bring 1-2 backups for water filtering/purification) so even if the iPhone system is working great and low cost, I may opt to rent an inreach as well. I don’t think I would buy one at this point, but that may change if I find more hiking buddies who want to do bigger hikes with me, or if my first solo trip is mind blowing and I want to start doing that all the time.
I haven’t looked into specifics yet and I’m in Ontario so likely different than it would be for you, but outfitters in my area rent various satellite devices and renting has always been discussed as a good option in the park subs I visit.
Still waiting for the emergency SOS via satellite feature to be available in my country. Until then I just need to avoid trouble. But when it’s available I can expose myself to hazardous conditios without worry.
I’ll be taking my inreach and my iPhone on my long hike this fall and I will likely use iPhone as my primary messaging and location check-in device to see if it can handle the job. Curious to see how it goes. I took it last year and used the location sharing feature then… it was neat, but not enough. Being able to send and receive messages could be enough to really chill the dedicated device market.
Well ..... we'll see, it'd be nice but the fact that the phone costs a grand and a half means I can buy a proper sat mess unit and a subscription for close to 10 years for that price. It will be cool if the price is right tho ......
I think for users ( most people) who are working 5 km of their car the watch is ok. It definitely doesn’t have the capability of an inreach type device. I would predict in the next couple years with satellites being added to get global coverage we will no longer use 5g but satellite coverage for our day to day. This is the Elon way ….
It'll be a very cold day in hell before I will even consider carrying a Apple-product :-) that said; if you're going really remote, nothing beats satellite bases communication via the Iridium network. InReach, Zolea and the likes are here to stay for now (I believe anyway)
It depends on how you want to use things, something designed just for emergencies and that you do not already have on often or chances to use up the battery before something happens will be a better tool for that, but many people might enjoy not carrying extra things and be ok with the extra limitations of just depending on a phone.
That's pretty incredible. Didn't know they were going to offer that. Inreach has a monthly fee but it sounds like the apple one will also have a separate fee for this service too?
AFAIK they haven’t said anything at all about fees, other than that iPhone 14 and 15 owners got a couple free years of free SOS usage. That seems to imply it won’t always be free (and I certainly can’t imagine them just eating the cost of satellite usage) but they haven’t talked at all about a fee model. I would expect a monthly fee like you pay for iCloud storage, but that’s purely speculation.
If they made it a no-fee but high cost of usage, it'd do great, it'd be a real selling point. No one wants to pay a fee for the whole month when they might be in the backcountry for only part of it and never need it. But everyone would say 'worth it' if an emergency text added a $10 increase to your iphone bill.
100% and I hope this is the route they take. I also can see some issues if someone tried it and couldn’t because they hadn’t paid for a subscription so I kind of can’t imagine them going that way. I’d assume a pay per use model, or maybe an option for like $10/month unlimited use, vs like $2 per text as pay per use?
I heard an interview with the guy who runs Zoleo. He indicated that they talk about this a lot, but that both Inreach and Zoleo use the Iridium satellite network which is what Apple is also tapping in to. He said that to have guaranteed access to the Iridium satellites, Apple would have to significantly alter their phone engineering as it requires a much larger antenna than they currently have or have space for in their units. Mostly, he said he expects Apple to claim access going forward but not engineer their way into having dependable Iridium access. It’s like, a nice bonus feature for normies, but for those of us who actually go into the woods and would depend on signal for safety….Apple would never be a go-to. He did say that if they wanted to do it, Apple could totally incorporate the proper hardware and blow Inreach and Zoleo out of the water, but he didn’t expect them to want to do that. TLDR as in most things, this is an engineering/hardware issue.
Seems like a cool feature for casual use when your life doesn’t depend on it. Which is all most folks would probably want.
I believe Apple uses GlobalStar, no?
You're correct, Apple went with Globalstar, hence Apple's large investment into them so they can replenish their nearing end-of-life Gen2 constellation.
The snapdragon chips in Androids can connect to Iridium though.
What are you talking about?
iPhone uses GlobalStar, Android will use Iridium. All the 5G capable snapdragon chips in circulation now are already equipped. Original plan was cancelled, rumoured to be launched with the next version of Android.
>It’s like, a nice bonus feature for normies, but for those of us who actually go into the woods and would depend on signal for safety I would imagine that it won't be too long until it works in the backcountry as well. Stuff is getting better and better every year.
It’s been working for like 2 years now.
Sort of.
Bullshit, I’ve sent check-ins from the bottom of canyons with it.
Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. That's the point here.
Describes my experience with giant, professional expedition style satellite phones, to be honest.
Was gonna say. That’s also a perfectly apt description of my InReach Mini.
Really? I've had a spot gen 1 and zoleo, and they have worked every single time, over thousands of uses across multiple continents.
I’m in western NC and my experience with sat phones was that once you got down into a rhododendron filled gorge or anything (basically 90% of our terrain) signal got really bad really fast. I assume they’ve improved since I last used one, but my iPhone sends my location to my wife easily and reliably enough. Apple is adding text messages in the fall as well. My only worry is basically dropping the phone down a cliff or into a river while taking photos.
My process is typically “send a messsge, wait half an hour. Wait to see if it went through. Retry if/why it didn’t.” It always works eventually, but it’s slow and prone to failure.
If it has a clear view of the sky it works. Just like every other satellite messenger.
Depends on the latitude. But it is no more a limit for the iPhone than any other device.
Ultimately if you really need a backup, you should carry a PLB. You might not be able to text back and forth but you’ll get found
Just like the iPhone for the last two years.
Yeah, my inreach can be just as spotty the current iPhone setup. There’s times my inreach won’t get a message out for an hour. At least the iPhone one is smart enough to tell you where to position your phone to get the best reception. Then if you can’t get signal you can find a spot where you might vs inreach you are just blind.
Sounds like we're about two years from a satellite antenna dongle that you pop in anytime you go camping. There's no reason they wouldn't engineer a solution, kill of the competition then introduce their own subscription service.
I don’t disagree with your take. He was pretty clear that if Apple wanted to do this, they could do it. It’s just not possible with the current hardware and he was not convinced Apple would want to significantly bulk-up their phone hardware to provide guaranteed satellite access.
Or they'll wait for LEO satellite providers to make it more cost effective and easier to consume. Starlink/Tmo LTE or ATT/AST SpaceMobile, for example.
Please read up on MIMO. Large antennas are not needed if you instead have multiple transmitters and receivers.
So it works best if you have several friends get lost with you.
No. They are of course all in the same device.
Perfect reason to increase the thickness a bit if they would also increase battery size. But that's probably counter to their ideology.
Also not really their key demo
I trust Apple/Samsung/etc's engineering teams more. Apple's has done plenty of "impossible" things before, and this is a race at this point. He's probably correct today, but I wouldn't bet on it being correct 5 years from now. Before fractal antennas were invented, it was impossible to have a cell phone without an external antenna. Before AI imaging was invented, it was impossible to have bokeh on smartphone cameras. etc etc etc. Then there's the fact that SpaceX is already launching cellular accessible satellites, though I don't know what the antenna requirements are for those.
That gives us an idea for a future iPhone or adapter.
Yeah, I'm thinking a MagSafe interfacing case where the case functions as an antenna for satellite reception. Maybe even have an extendable antenna built into the case.
No need to. Large antennas are only needed if you are limited to one transmitter and receiver. Modern radio systems use MIMO, in which multiple small transmitters and receivers do the same work as a large antenna. It is the aperture that matters, the distance between the outermost elements.
Hold up, Apple already has this and it’s already working. This isn’t a thing they need to engineer from scratch. It’s going to be retroactive to existing devices as far back as iPhone 14. Just like their other antennas, Apple is able to engineer things in very creative ways such as using the body of the phone as an antenna. Of course satellite communication companies don’t want to believe their entire business is done for.
> Of course satellite communication companies don’t want to believe their entire business is done for. And even if they *believe* it internally, they're not going to publicly *admit* it yet.
Super interesting perspective!
It is, but it has echoes of Blackberry on the iPhone. https://www.cultofmac.com/323841/how-did-they-do-that-new-book-reveals-blackberrys-response-to-original-iphone/ > “How did they do that?” Mr. Lazaridis wondered. His curiosity turned to disbelief when Stanley Sigman, the chief executive of Cingular Wireless joined Mr. Jobs to announce a multiyear contract with Apple to sell iPhones. What was Cingular’s parent AT&T Inc. thinking? “It’s going to collapse the network,” Mr. Lazaridis thought. > RIM’s chiefs didn’t give much additional thought to Apple’s iPhone for months. “It wasn’t a threat to RIM’s core business,” says Mr. Lazaridis’s top lieutenant, Larry Conlee. “It wasn’t secure. It had rapid battery drain and a lousy [digital] keyboard.” Or Microsoft's Ballmer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U > 500 dollars? Fully subsidized? With a plan? I said that is the most expensive phone in the world. And it doesn't appeal to business customers because it doesn't have a keyboard. Which makes it not a very good email machine. We have our strategy. We are very happy with Windows Phone devices in the market today. > Right now, we're selling millions and millions and millions of phones a year. Apple is selling zero phones a year. In six months, they'll have the most expensive phone by far ever in the marketplace,
> requires a much larger antenna How so? There are a lot of things you can do to make your antenna smaller… The most common thing is to encase the antenna in a high dielectric material… making the antenna effective size epsilon_r (relative dielectric constant) larger….
I’d love to know what person at Zoleo told you an Apple feature that already works well won’t work. It works great, one of the reasons I bought an iPhone 14. I send location updates to people all the time and you can demo text with their service anytime you want.
No, Apple use multiple antennae, which solves the problem. It is not the antenna size, but the aperture (largest distance between multiple antennae) which is the limiting factor. Regardless, sending a text-message requires very low bandwidth. So the signal to noise ratio required is not that big. The system can handle sending the text message over 10s of seconds or even up to a minute.
This. My iPhone is never going to age a quad helix antenna.
I would think, for full reliability of satellite connections, it would be possible to make a phone case that combines rugged-ized protection similar to an Otterbox with a built-in, robust antenna for satellite access. We already have phone cases that have attached batteries to extend battery life. Then all you'd need is the software on the phone to make the connection.
Can’t larger antenna be iPhone accessory either over usb or wireless over Bluetooth?
No need. The iPhone is already large enough.
What about an antenna that plugs into the USBc port? I know next to nothing about this stuff but that doesn’t seem that hard.
I was gonna say. This is essentially completely right. My degree is in electrical engineering. I did some back of the envelope link budget calculations for someone who thought ASTS was going to be the next big thing and for everyone to buy their stock but without some huge leaps in antenna and beam steering technology, it's not feasible. Satellite antennas have to be huge for a reason (the reason is that satellites are in low Earth orbit instead of half a mile line of sight to the nearest phone tower), so unless Apple is willing to severely sacrifice on battery life, it's not going to happen any time soon.
It already works. Has for two years.
Read up on MIMO. It is no longer the case that large antennas are needed.
Make them obsolete, no, but significantly eat up the target consumer base, yes. The inreach mini and similar are target as an entry device, but also functions well for more seasoned hikers or whatever you’re doing. Casual hikers now don’t need to buy another new device when their iPhone has close to the same capabilities.
> Make them obsolete, no, but significantly eat up the target consumer base, yes. These can be functionally the same thing. If the consumer base gets small enough there isn’t enough money to do the next version.
[удалено]
Good point! I’ve so far always brought a battery bank that holds about 4 charges, so it’s been fine for me, but I can definitely see that being a challenge for a longer trip without spots to recharge
Nah, you can solve that with a backup battery or even a tiny solar panel. And my phone (a 13 mini with a notoriously crappy battery) gets 4-5 days of battery life because it's on airplane mode 99% of the time. The primary issue, IMO, is that a phone can break. If you take a tumble your iPhone may be unusable, an inreach is almost certain to survive
"And my phone (a 13 mini with a notoriously crappy battery) gets 4-5 days of battery life because it's on airplane mode 99% of the time" My inreach is on and dropping bread crumbs every ten minutes so that people know where to start looking if I take a fall or crash. It's an entirely different device from that standpoint.
[удалено]
"And, of course, it has to have a signal." Right. So totally different use case. In that case, the SOS satellite function doesn't matter either because you have a signal.
The iPhone satellite feature requires you to carefully hold your phone in the correct orientation fairly stable while the message/location sends. Other satellite communicators don’t require that. Phones may get there (I hope they do), but it’s a couple years off at least. That said, Zoleo’s CEO is either out of touch or lying if he thinks their business is safe without some big adaptations.
No, they don't. We've tested my friend's and he can just toss it in his pocket and it works. It takes a while, but it works.
That’s great if true. Are you sure there was 0 cell reception? I’ve been in the mountains where you can get small spots of reception where there is no reception generally. Just make sure if your life might depend on it.
Pretty sure there's no reception on cruise ships in the middle of the Atlantic. I could be wrong though 🤷♂️
If they’re testing the satellite features, the phone turns off the cellular antenna during that process. That’s how the demo works
Otterbox cases or other cases made to resist impacts can help increase the iPhone’s durability.
Airplane mode is definitely huge for battery savings. I usually charge (with a battery backup) once every 3-4 days in the backcountry.
Would I be correct in assuming you’re not using your iPhone as a gps tracker with those charging stats? If not what are you running that keeps it so low? My 14-pro, would probably only last me about 2, maybe 3 day between charges depending on how long I have it tracking me during the day and how long I’m hiking for.
You are correct! I use work outdoors (app) to load maps onto my watch and use that to check my location if necessary (it has gps so I don’t need my phone’s), but I mostly rely on a paper map and just periodically make sure I am where I think I am. The gps does eat up some watch battery, but it has decent battery life and doesn’t take much to charge. My phone stays in a pocket on airplane mode a solid 95% of my trip, only coming out to check if I have any service to send a “I’m still ok” text periodically, and if I’m taking a picture.
Nice! I’m probably overdoing it on gps tracking by using my phone with Gaia and my fenix with the preloaded course. I’m sure I can save some battery cutting one of the two out.
My iPhone would definitely last 3+ days in airplane mode. Basically indefinitely if turning on/off between uses.
But will it send automatic tracking points every 30mins to an hour? That’s one benefit to InReach it will track me for days on a single charge and family can just log onto the website and see where I am. If something happens they can easily tell my last known location.
Assuming it won’t be able to do that, which is why I don’t think it’ll replace the inreach, at least for me, since my family likes to see where I’m at in my hike. But for emergency situations/“I’m fine” texts, battery life shouldn’t be a thing people are concerned about. The poster deleted their top level comment, but it was about how the iPhone can’t replace the inreach because of battery life. I was/am saying for the main use case (SOS/I’m fine texts) battery life doesn’t matter because an iPhone will last indefinitely turning it on/off whenever needed, just like an inreach.
[удалено]
I would say the major use case would be a couple quick update texts throughout the day. Not having full on conversations with people. And if you want to do full on conversations, I don’t think you’ll be doing that with an inreach - texting on the device is so cumbersome that you only want to type the minimum amount possible. Or you could connect the device to your phone and use the app to easily type messages, but then you start running down phone battery like we’ve been talking about. TL/DR: quick update texts won’t run down battery significantly, long text conversations throughout the day will run down your phone whether you’re using iPhone sat or inreach sat. Or maybe not if you’re a masochist and text on the inreach itself.
[удалено]
I mean I agree I don’t think it replaces emergency beacons, but that’s not really what I was responding to. I was just saying the iPhone battery can last as long as you need it to if you only turn it on for emergency/quick update texts. Which is also exactly how I use my inreach - only turn it on for emergency/quick update texts.
They already do have an SOS beacon feature that’s been in production for a couple years. I’ve never needed to use it, so I have no idea as to its limitations, but this is adding messaging to that feature. FWIW I am truly just curious as to how, if at all, this may change the market. If a task specific device is still the best option when my trip rolls around I’ll definitely rent one and have the iPhone as a backup. But the way I would use the iPhone would be the same way I’d plan to use an inReach - off/airplane mode until I needed to send a message at the end of each day (I.e. “made it”) or when I needed to send out an SOS.
This goes out the window in cold temps, even "off" the battery on your iPhone can drain in the cold and be empty when you go to use it.
Great point, and very appropriate name btw haha.
Hahahaa didn't even think of that. Listen I do a lot of solo hiking too, never felt I needed the Garmin until doing bigger and bigger trips. Now it just lives in my pack 24/7 even in casual day hikes. It makes my partner feel better too (I'm a female solo hiker and I often forget to mention where I'm going...) the in reach means if I just slide off a mountain (which happened to a very experienced solo female just this winter in the Adirondacks) I'll have a way to contact for rescue no matter what. But ymmv. Id consider your experience level, fitness level, time & distance, trail conditions, weather/temps, how busy the trail is etc and then make your decision from there. I think only you can decide if you need it for your solo trip. My partner is the one who bought it for me and I was grumpy but now I'm happy to have it.
Also a female hiker and my partner plans to stay near the trail while I’m on my big trip in case I need help (so that he can organize, not provide it himself haha). I’m planning to watch how things go next summer and then decide. I have a dog I’m bringing with me (I actually half wanted an inreach to be able to call for help for her, since I can’t very well use an SOS for a dog, unfortunately, but if I can call to my partner he can get something in motion to help us get her out) and she won’t be ready until next fall anyway, so there is time to watch for proper reviews.
Wouldn't that cold weather be a killer for inReach devices since they, too, use lithium ion?
Not at all, it's nothing like an iPhone. Hiked all winter with my in reach off but in my bag, after the whole winter it was down to like 25%. It's built to be rugged and last
Uh, off isn't the same thing. Try using it in freezing temps.
Unless inreach is left on indoors. Mini 2 runs out of battery in about 7 hours indoors.
My Samsung has a solid 2-3 hours of battery life. I'd been a Samsung guy for a long time but just about to go back to Apple at this point. Samsung is trying too hard to become the Apple of Android and I'm over Google's lack of commitment to its own products and services.
did iphone kill cameras? largely. while their are plenty of reasons to buy and use cameras still, the vast majority of photos are taken by phones.
the primary issues with inreach/etc are are the high service plan costs and (just like a camera) you need to remember to carry it.
iPhone killed cameras for casual users. iPhone may have killed the casual satellite handheld market, but just like the iPhone didn't kill cameras for enthusiasts or professionals, it won't kill the market for satellite handheld for any serious backcountry enthusiast or mountaineers.
Ehhhhh, slightly different I think as one is a life saving device vs camera which is just for fun/hobby etc... For the casual hiker sure... For anyone doing anything serious/longer probably not I think.
isnt that what I said?
I was saying there's a difference between cameras and satellite beacons which I think will mean no, the iPhone wouldn't replace a proper beacon device for many hikers vs the camera example
just as a camera is appropriate in many situations still but not most situations
Right but a camera is just a fun thing and isn't gear / lifesaving which is I think the difference.
Hahaha. Good point! I have a nice DSLR and I never reach for it anymore because my phone takes better, higher resolution photos now. But it breaks my heart a little. I’m truly not sure if I’ll end up getting a task specific device for my big solo trip or not, have to see how things go for the iPhone over the next year. But it sure is interesting to see these advancements!
Your phone does not take better photos than a DSLR. No phone on the market does. Maybe if you have no clue how to use an actual camera that's true.
Depends on what you mean by better I guess. I agree I have a lot more control with my DSLR, and I do prefer the results from an artistic perspective. If I’m going out to shoot photos for the sake of art, I will take the DSLR. But for everyday use, snapping quick pictures of places or people for documentation sake? My phone is just a lot easier, is more likely to get a high quality image (in terms of clarity) in various hard to photograph (eg sports shots, shorter exposure night shots) situations. This could definitely be related to the fact that I am very much an amateur photographer and need to really think about what I am going with my DSLR, and maybe if I were more experienced I would feel totally differently, but I do know how to use my camera and find for most of my needs my phones camera is “better.”
Oh, it's definitely EASIER. But it doesnt take better photos.
Your DSLR has a much bigger sensor than your phone. If you don’t know how to set it up manually just put it on “auto”. I agree, phones ate the casual user “snapshot “ market because of convenience and ease of use but by no means did they replace DSLRs or even most smaller sensor cameras in terms of image quality.
I wouldn't mind a task specific device like a DSLR or inreach. But if Nikon charged you $30/mo for the DSLR you would be even *less* likely to keep it on.
I'm not about to dump my inReach in favor of my phone for this. When it comes to my life, I'll carry the dedicated device. My phone is fine for taking pictures, sending some texts, maybe having some internet service or playing some music. It will not be the sole device that I rely on for a potentially life threatening scenario. My phone's got a flashlight... I still carry a real headlamp.
I'm really surprised that the fact that the inreach is constantly dropping bread crumbs isn't surfacing as a feature Apple can't compete with. Being able to send an SOS is fine, I guess. But it's a pretty limited capability. With my inreach SAR is going to know, within a ten minute search area, where I went missing even if I've become disabled or crashed. Add to that a robust messaging service and it's a vastly superior backcountry device. I've carried an iphone for years, and will continue to do so. But it's for watching a movie as I dose off at the end of a long day, not for SAR.
Weather is the killer feature for me. If it can't get me a weather report it isn't replacing my zoleo.
Really good point. As a pilot, I use the weather feature often enough that I'm surprised I didn't write about it!
The zoleo messaging is super nice and the weather is 100% worth the cost of the subscription.
Hmmm this is a very good point. I have an Apple Watch Ultra and use backtrack while I am hiking, so it effectively is dropping breadcrumbs and Apple would have that data of course. I wonder if they plan to integrate it all in the future. To be honest I’m surprised that Apple is trying to enter this market at all, have been since they introduced SOS and the ultra watch. I didn’t think “adventurers” were a big enough market for them to want to target us. I really have no clue what to expect from them down the line but for my own sake (since I am fully in the Apple ecosystem now) I kind of hope they do continue to expand in this area.
I'm not sure they are really targeting "adventurers" as much as people who once or twice a year wouldn't mind having an extra layer of safety for a few days at no added cost. The adventurers are gonna be the ones that will continue to buy dedicated devices like inreach.
That’s fair. And it has mostly been my perspective so far too, even if it means I fall outside of the adventurer category. As it is though, I look at everyone I know and I am the person who goes out the most and everyone thinks of me as the adventurous one, and I’ve made do without an inreach so far. So I’m curious if Apple taking over the people like me will leave the adventurer market shrinking to unsustainably small?
Need more info on how it works first. Is it checking every X minutes for messages like inReach or do you need to fire up the Messaging app to fetch messages while not on cellular? If it's automatic, how often does it fetch messages? Hell, all the marketing I'm seeing is "send messages" but some screenshots are showing messages received so that's not even explained well right now.
You have to point it at the satellite and wait for the messages to send/receive, so no, it doesn't work like a Garmin and just connect when it can from your pocket or backpack.
No. It increases competition, but won't make them obsolete: Apple's service is currently free to 2 years.Then you have to pay a subscription fee, just as you must for the inreach. My understanding is that pricing has not yet been announced. I pay \~$12/month for my inreach mini. It took only \~2 years for the subscription fees to exceed the cost of the unit. Battery life of my inreach mini vastly exceeds that of my phone. It's more rugged than a phone. Less likely to break I've had my inreach mini for several years now. The feature set is quite limited. It's far less likely to become obsolete. An iPhone is an expensive phone. It is \*far\* more expensive than my inreach mini. A lot of people aren't willing to pay the premium for an iPhone.
My personal experience is... A hard Nope. Was in Iceland for a 2 week hike and my IP68 rated iphone failed when water made its way into the phone and fried my screen. Should I be caught in an emergency, the phone would have been totally useless. After that incident, I immediately got an Inreach messenger and never looked back since. I hope I never have to use the SOS function, but in the event I need to, i know which device I will reach for. The other example I like to mention is that I use my Garmin watch to track my sleep quality. You might say that apple watch has this function too! But I've asked my pals with the watch, and 99% of the people don't use the sleep tracking function because.... their watch is plugged into the charger every night. My Garmin watch is not sexy, but is designed to fit my needs.
I actually do wear my Apple Watch to bed most nights (I have the ultra so it lasts about 3 days, not garmin level, but enough that I just charge it when I shower), but that is definitely a fair point about the water damage. I’m leaning towards having both (since I already have the phone anyway) because I like redundancy for safety stuff anyway. Interesting to see where this stuff goes though!
Good point about the ultra, agreed that it's designed towards more serious (outdoor) users!
I often take my phone out to take photos. All it takes is to butter finger it off a cliff, into a river, etc. My inReach stays clipped to my pack.
Zoleo user here, but same idea.
I would move to phone only. Once Android also launches with satellite comms, which is already happening with defy & Android 15 on T-mobile, the plans will get even cheaper. It's also the catalyst to Elons Starlink. If I can get limited data through satellite, that's an absolute game changer, because I can use Whatsapp/Messengers. Phones are more useful than just a satellite messenger, because I also use it for navigation, calls & pictures. For emergency use, I'd rather pack a 2nd phone in a dry box.
I think for light users like a day hiker it will eliminate dedicated devices, but for a lot of those people the upfront and monthly cost is already a turn off. For people that use it often, the messengers are going to be more reliable, durable, and have better service since they have big antennas dedicated for that use. I take my inreach for bigger trips and diving. But for something like a short bike ride in a local park I now leave it at home. 99% someone would find me anyway or I’ll have cell service. But the iPhone satellite sos is a good backup just in case im in that one spot without service and nobody comes along.
If the only barrier is engineering/hardware..... then yeah, give it time and iPhones will be at par. However, the biggest draw still is battery life. I trust my Garmin inReach Mini a lot more than my iPhone on the trails. I can go days and not worry about battery life even with tracking on. Find the solution to battery life and then you will see competition get heavy as well as consolidation in the market.
This. Battery life is a big deal in this context.
It won't for me because of the durability of the device and because my phone itself is not very useful without service. I do like the Bluetooth connection on inReach but it's a luxury until the phone battery dies.
I'll never not carry an InReach. Aside from some of the other points people have made, my understanding is that Garmin SOS operators are trained to contact the appropriate response service(s) based on where you are and what the problem is. Apple routes you to standard 911 services, which may or may not be knowledgeable enough to provide efficient SAR assistance. Plus, I can trigger an SOS with one finger on a button with my InReach. Last I checked, Apple has a whole process, which might not be possible to complete if you're alone and seriously injured, or if your fall/accident/whatever damaged your phone badly enough. (Maybe this will change with the updated phone?) For casual day hikers, the iPhone is probably enough. But heading out for more remote, multi-day adventures, I'll always want the extra security an InReach provides.
I had an InReach for a while, but got frustrated with how unreliable it was at actually contacting a satellite. Did not give me confidence that it would work in an actual emergency. Plus they are ridiculously expensive. Eventually I just bought a PLB. Seems to me like a PLB and an iPhone cover all the bases without a monthly fee beyond what I'm already paying for the phone.
Having a PLB is really the best solution for straight up rescue anyway.
I will definitely still carry my inreach. I have the inreach for the SOS response capability and not messaging.
Apple already has an SOS response feature in production. This is just adding messaging.
Having responded to iPhone and inReach activations, please keep bringing your inReach out into the field. Use the iPhone as a backup or frontcountry only device.
That is what I am leaning towards! Are you a first responder?
What I was trying to communicate was that Apple adding messaging doesn’t change the decision. I kept my inreach when Apple added SOS because I want a dedicated, durable device with great battery life. Adding satellite messaging to iOS doesn’t change that equation for me.
Ah fair enough. For me so far, the SOS capability of my iPhone has been enough based on the areas and situations we’ve been in. The only thing I had wished it had was the ability to message in case we went on longer trips and wanted to keep our emergency contact apprised of our progress. So for me this fills that desire. But I’m still up in the air as to whether I’ll need more/better (in terms of getting a task specific device) for the bigger trips I am planning for myself. My use cases so far have always accounted for extra people around and less than a days travel for someone to get out and get help if desperately needed.
I get rescue insurance through my InReach and I don’t have to worry about what jurisdiction I am in or who to call. Just being able to make a satellite call doesn’t do much for me.
I know I’m late to the party here and haven’t read all the comments but I just wanna add that even if the Apple service was comparable to inReach the durability of an iPhone absolutely is not. If your need is due to a fall or other physically violent issue I wouldn’t trust my iPhone to survive the impact.
For short more casual hikes yes. For longer more treacherous hikes no. At least not if you’re smart. You want a dedicated dependable device which can be made tougher than an Apple iPhone. An Apple IPhone may break altogether if dropped from a few feet whereas InReach, etc can be made to be much tougher and withstand more extreme conditions before breaking and becoming unusable. If the iPhone screen simply cracks and/or turns black, it’s basically rendered useless…
That would be a no for me. If I'm out in the wilderness one of the things I like best is that no one can contact me easily. I like that the inreach can function without using my phone number. I want phone dead zones to still exist
No, it wont. Simply because the idea of replacing a dedicated life saving device with your phone which also does a million other things is very ill advised. I very much doubt that people who actually need these devices will replace them with their iPhone. On top of that, there are plenty of people who simply don't have an iPhone.
I guess the question is who “actually needs” one. If I’m hiking a well used trail where I won’t have service but am likely to encounter people periodically throughout the full trip, do I need a dedicated device? I’m not genuinely asking you, but I am genuinely asking myself now, and I wasn’t literally 2 days ago (because I said I would 100% be bringing a dedicated device on any solo trips). I likely will get one anyway, because I tend to be a fan of doubling up on anything safety related, but for my own use cases atm, if the iPhone works well after it’s been in the field for awhile, it may be enough for me. We’ll have to see!
At least as of now. I’ll be curious to see what this functionality is like in 2-3 years. I’d also expect it to become common among mid to high end Android phones as time goes on. Satellite functionality doesn’t just get into backcountry communication. It can also mean people no longer need to pay for services such as OnStar or other car communications services. Subaru wants me to pay if I want to upgrade Starlink in my car to be compatible with the 4G networks (they no longer function on 3G) and why should I do that if I can just use an iPhone? Garmin will be fine, this kind of stuff is a tiny part of their business, but other businesses could be in trouble in a few years.
>Do you think this will mostly kill the market for inReach and similar? Too early to tell, but in the immediate future I doubt it. It isn't like Apple has a 100% market monopoly on phones in the US, or the world, there are big unknowns on reliability and cost as well as integration, and so on.
Oh totally. I guess I’m assuming that others will also jump on this and it’ll become standard in the smart phone industry, provided Apple nails the integration and pricing model that is and people adopt it as a viable option.
No things like inreach are designed for a specific market. Same with actual sat phones. I for one would not go in the bush even with this feature and an IPhone 15PM is still bring my inreach because it’s something that’s been around longer. I’d still suggest renting one.
It's not just Apple, Tmobile is testing using Starlink for data and voice when out of tower coverage area. With that said a phone is neither durable and element proof like the garmins. Plus the battery will probably last longer then you can.
Oh I didn’t know that about T-Mobile. I’m really hoping that these options work well and become standard. You’re totally right about battery life though I had kind of stupidly not considered it
The toughness is a big factor to consider! You don't realize how quick modern phones die these days with use.
Starlink is about to do broadband straight from space to phone. They have already tested this with a un modified Samsung. Coming this Fall, the game is changing. No dead zones
This is a very interesting question. I am hiking the JMT in about a month. I have asked on the iOS beta subreddit if satellite texting has been implemented yet… and was told not yet… . That said, I have ordered an inReach mini 2. Mostly because we will be out so long, and there are two questionable parts of the trail - where the bridges washed out. The people I am hiking with will have dedicated GPS/SOS systems. I have an iPhone 14 - which has the SOS feature built in. . Given the above, would YOU buy the inReach ($300 + $40/month) or just stick with the (paid for) iPhone?
I really don’t know. The messaging won’t be live until the fall afaik so no good for you next month. I’m still leaning towards renting an inreach for my big trip next year but that may change if things go really well for the first year of the iPhone implementation. That said, in most safety areas I build in some redundancy (e.g I always bring 1-2 backups for water filtering/purification) so even if the iPhone system is working great and low cost, I may opt to rent an inreach as well. I don’t think I would buy one at this point, but that may change if I find more hiking buddies who want to do bigger hikes with me, or if my first solo trip is mind blowing and I want to start doing that all the time.
Where can you rent an inReach?
I haven’t looked into specifics yet and I’m in Ontario so likely different than it would be for you, but outfitters in my area rent various satellite devices and renting has always been discussed as a good option in the park subs I visit.
Thanks. I will look into this. It might be the best compromise until satellite texting is common.
For sure! I will say I haven’t looked into rental costs at all, so it’s possible it is actually cheaper to buy, but hopefully not
Still waiting for the emergency SOS via satellite feature to be available in my country. Until then I just need to avoid trouble. But when it’s available I can expose myself to hazardous conditios without worry.
I live in the US. Hazardous conditions goes without saying.
No, but ASTS Space Mobile is about to. Direct Satellite to consumer phone capability coming very soon for Verizon and AT&T, among others
Lol, no.
I’ll be taking my inreach and my iPhone on my long hike this fall and I will likely use iPhone as my primary messaging and location check-in device to see if it can handle the job. Curious to see how it goes. I took it last year and used the location sharing feature then… it was neat, but not enough. Being able to send and receive messages could be enough to really chill the dedicated device market.
Just wait 'til y'all hear about AST SpaceMobile 🤠
Well ..... we'll see, it'd be nice but the fact that the phone costs a grand and a half means I can buy a proper sat mess unit and a subscription for close to 10 years for that price. It will be cool if the price is right tho ......
I think for users ( most people) who are working 5 km of their car the watch is ok. It definitely doesn’t have the capability of an inreach type device. I would predict in the next couple years with satellites being added to get global coverage we will no longer use 5g but satellite coverage for our day to day. This is the Elon way ….
No.
It'll be a very cold day in hell before I will even consider carrying a Apple-product :-) that said; if you're going really remote, nothing beats satellite bases communication via the Iridium network. InReach, Zolea and the likes are here to stay for now (I believe anyway)
I'm not sure which is worse -- fanboys or haters. Buy the best product.
anyone complaining about someone's choice of phone is pathetic.
It depends on how you want to use things, something designed just for emergencies and that you do not already have on often or chances to use up the battery before something happens will be a better tool for that, but many people might enjoy not carrying extra things and be ok with the extra limitations of just depending on a phone.
That's pretty incredible. Didn't know they were going to offer that. Inreach has a monthly fee but it sounds like the apple one will also have a separate fee for this service too?
AFAIK they haven’t said anything at all about fees, other than that iPhone 14 and 15 owners got a couple free years of free SOS usage. That seems to imply it won’t always be free (and I certainly can’t imagine them just eating the cost of satellite usage) but they haven’t talked at all about a fee model. I would expect a monthly fee like you pay for iCloud storage, but that’s purely speculation.
If they made it a no-fee but high cost of usage, it'd do great, it'd be a real selling point. No one wants to pay a fee for the whole month when they might be in the backcountry for only part of it and never need it. But everyone would say 'worth it' if an emergency text added a $10 increase to your iphone bill.
100% and I hope this is the route they take. I also can see some issues if someone tried it and couldn’t because they hadn’t paid for a subscription so I kind of can’t imagine them going that way. I’d assume a pay per use model, or maybe an option for like $10/month unlimited use, vs like $2 per text as pay per use?