Starlink vs. Globalstar: Battle between Tim Cook and Elon Musk
Elon Musk of Starlink and Tim Cook of Apple (Images X.com)
Apple vs. Starlink: Tim Cook’s Globalstar Partnership Shields Ecosystem from Elon Musk’s Predatory Moves in Satellite Connectivity Battle
By P. SESH KUMAR
NEW DELHI, June 6, 2025 – Globalstar plugged into the titanic battle between two tech giants of the US — Apple led by Tim Cook and Starlink of Elon Musk. Cook partnered Globalstar to protect Apple’s ecosystem from possible predatory action of Musk.
To understand the stakes, one must begin with the fundamental technological differences between the two systems.
Globalstar’s satellite constellation operates in the low Earth orbit (LEO) range, but with some crucial constraints. It uses a relatively narrow-band spectrum (particularly in the S-band and L-band), and its constellation comprises a limited number of satellites—currently around 48 second-generation satellites launched between 2010 and 2013, with some modernization underway. Globalstar’s architecture is understood to be relatively dated and heavily reliant on bent-pipe communication.
That means signals sent from a user’s phone to a satellite must be immediately relayed back down to a terrestrial gateway station before they can be routed to the broader internet or mobile network. This introduces latency (time lag or buffering) and restricts coverage in areas where such gateway stations are sparse or overloaded. Moreover, Globalstar does not provide full internet connectivity; its integration with Apple’s iPhones, for instance, is understood to be limited to emergency messaging and location tracking in remote areas. It cannot support regular voice calls or internet browsing.
Starlink, by contrast, appears far more ambitious and modernized LEO constellation. With over 6,000 satellites currently in orbit (as of mid-2025) and aggressive expansion plans for up to 12,000 satellites, Starlink offers a fundamentally different technological model. Unlike Globalstar, Starlink satellites are equipped with inter-satellite laser links, enabling them to pass data among themselves in space without immediately relying on ground stations.
Starlink in India: Role of CAG and Regulatory Considerations
This allows for lower latency, broader coverage, and more resilience to network congestion. Starlink is also broadband-first—designed from the ground up to deliver high-speed internet, often exceeding 100 Mbps in ideal conditions. When SpaceX partnered with T-Mobile to launch “Starlink Direct to Cell,” experts say, it marked a breakthrough in marrying broadband satellite infrastructure with traditional mobile devices.
The new-generation Starlink satellites are equipped with direct-to-device capabilities, allowing them to communicate with standard LTE mobile phones without requiring specialized antennas or new hardware. That is a significant leap in user convenience and infrastructure bypass.
But this sophistication comes at a cost—literally. Starlink’s infrastructure is capital-intensive, involving continuous satellite launches (at $250,000–$500,000 per unit) and the development of custom ground terminals and frequency-sharing mechanisms. However, the operating cost per user is expected to fall sharply over time due to economies of scale and mass production.
Globalstar, in contrast, has a more modest cost profile, but its limited bandwidth, older satellites, and lack of in-space routing make it far less competitive in a world increasingly demanding high-speed mobile connectivity.
Incidentally, India’s ISRO (Indian Space Research Organization) is a leader in affordable, precise launches, particularly for small satellites and international clients. But SpaceX, through reusability and mass production, would have driven down per-satellite launch costs dramatically, enabling an aggressive rollout of the Starlink constellation. If ISRO adopts reusability via its upcoming Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) program and scales LVM3 launches, it could emerge as a formidable low-cost alternative for broadband satellite constellations, especially for developing countries.
The divergence in capabilities between Starlink and Gloalstar, experts say, becomes most apparent in quality of service. Starlink-T-Mobile promises near-broadband satellite connectivity directly to smartphones, enabling SMS, voice, and eventually data streaming in areas without traditional cell coverage.
Early demonstrations in remote areas have shown that users can send texts and even initiate basic voice calls with minimal latency. Globalstar, on the other hand, appears to only enable emergency SOS messages, and even that is stated to be restricted by geographic coverage and congestion on its spectrum.
Trump-Musk Feud Over ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ Kills Bromance
Then there is the matter of scalability. Starlink’s design is inherently modular and scalable, with new satellites launched every few weeks via SpaceX’s reusable rockets. The network improves as it grows. Globalstar’s expansion, by contrast, is slower, riskier, and heavily reliant on financial support from partners like Apple, which committed over $1.1 billion to fund the next generation of satellites.
Even then, experts suggest that Globalstar’s planned upgrades will only marginally improve its capabilities compared to the leapfrogging pace at which Starlink evolves.
The regulatory environment also reflects the technological gap. Because Globalstar operates with long-held spectrum rights and limited services, it has largely flown under the radar of telecom regulators. Apple’s partnership with Globalstar, however, now puts it on edge—should regulators decide that Apple is essentially becoming a satellite telecom provider.
Starlink, with its growing influence and aggressive frequency usage, is more visible to regulators and spectrum watchdogs. Musk’s decision to challenge Globalstar’s spectrum usage in court was not just a legal manoeuvre—it was a shot at the very legitimacy of Apple’s chosen partner.
From a customer perspective, the difference is increasingly obvious. Starlink’s offering—especially when paired with T-Mobile’s terrestrial network—is considered robust, expansive, and feature-rich, promising meaningful services in the most remote parts of the world. Globalstar, in contrast, appears currently a niche add-on, useful in life-or-death scenarios but not something users can rely on for everyday connectivity.
In sum, the technologies represent two different paradigms. Globalstar is legacy infrastructure trying to stay relevant with financial infusion and limited upgrades. Starlink is next-generation, aggressively modular, and designed for high-bandwidth applications that go far beyond messaging. As smartphone users come to expect uninterrupted, high-speed connectivity anywhere on Earth, it seems increasingly likely that Starlink will define the gold standard. Whether regulators, telcos, or even Apple agree—or can catch up—is another question entirely.
(This is an opinion piece; views expressed solely belong to the author)
Follow The Raisina Hills on WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn
About The Author
