Best Satellite Communicators of 2025

Our Picks of Satellite Communicators

Best Overall with Photo and Voice Messaging

Garmin inReach Messenger Plus

2-way Messaging?	Yes
Satellite Network	Iridium
Battery Life	Up to 25 days in low power mode
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	Yes
Measured Weight	4.1 oz

The Garmin inReach Messenger Plus is the ideal device for reliable wilderness communications. It is as reliable as satellite communications can get. It is compact enough to carry on any human-powered adventure. It leverages proven and established partnerships, protocols, and technologies. Finally, it includes all the latest and greatest messaging attributes. The accepted bare minimum in satellite messaging is two-way texting and SOS messaging. The Messenger Plus has that. You can expect seamless messaging across cellular and WiFi networks, as well as app-based text composition and viewing. The Plus has that too. Finally, we haven't expected photo and voice transmission on a device like this for years. Garmin accelerated the timeline for Messenger Plus. This device and service offer the transmission of photos and short voice memos.

Multiple other devices and services offer the basic messaging function that we reference. However, only the Garmin inReach Messenger Plus offers photo and voice memo transmission. The only downside of the added features of the Messenger Plus is the cost. As GearLab Founder Chris McNamara notes, “I used to never go on a backcountry adventure without the Messenger, but now I only use the Messenger for multi-day trips. For day trips, I now rely on my iPhone 16 with satellite messaging. With the iPhone, it is not easy to share my location and send text messages to let my family know where I am and what time I will be home.” The downside to the iPhone is that it does not offer “bread crumb” tracking and is more finicky to get a signal. Overall, Messenger Plus remains the best option for robust backcountry communication and tracking.

Read more: Garmin inReach Messenger Plus review

Best Value for Messaging

Garmin inReach Messenger

2-way Messaging?	Yes
Satellite Network	Iridium
Battery Life	Up to 28 days with a message or location sent every 10 minutes with full sky view
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	Yes
Measured Weight	4.0 oz

If you don't need to send photos and voice memos, the Garmin inReach Messenger saves you a few hundred dollars over the Messenger Plus. Both devices have the same form factor and use the same satellite network and dispatch services. They share subscription rates and options. They both offer a rudimentary on-device interface and access to a much more useful smartphone app. Both offer long battery life and the option to charge small electronics from the internal inReach battery.

The only potential advantage of Messenger vs. Messenger Plus is better battery life. At maximum battery economy, they aren't that different. inReach claims 28 days for the Messenger and 25 days for the Messenger Plus. However, this isn't a direct comparison. To achieve 25 days of battery life on Messenger Plus, you must enable a low battery mode. The device will then only check for incoming messages every 10 minutes after sending them, and subsequently, once every hour. The claimed 28 days (we haven't achieved the claimed battery life in our testing, but we've come close enough to use Garmin's numbers for effective internal comparison) in the Messenger-sans-Plus is achievable with continuous message checks. There is no battery savings option on Messenger Plus. To get continuous message monitoring on Messenger Plus, you will drain your battery in about 5 days. Our testing confirms this: the low power mode in Messenger Plus appears to have a battery drain rate similar to that of Messenger. Higher power mode in the Messenger Plus visibly drains the battery faster. Either way, though, these devices have excellent battery life for those with good backcountry battery habits.

Read more: Garmin inReach Messenger review

Best Value for iPhone Users

iPhone Satellite Messaging

2-way Messaging?	Yes
Satellite Network	Globalstar
Battery Life	Depends on other phone usage
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	No
Measured Weight	7.3 oz

Every year, Apple's iPhone satellite messaging capabilities continue to improve. It is now practical to share your location and message. As noted above, we now rely on iPhone messaging for daytrips and short stints away from cell coverage. It's free if you already have an iPhone and very intuitive to use. Additionally, your contacts will easily recognize that it is a message from your phone. For most other messaging services, the people you message will see a message from a new number. You often have to coach your contacts before a trip to expect messages from an unknown number or they often need to download a messaging app. All of this is a lot of extra work compared to the iPhone, which just works. It is especially seamless if you already share your location with someone. If that person wants to keep tabs on your days adventure, they can easily check in with your location using the Find My app.

The big downside to iPhone messaging is that it uses a less robust satellite network. You often have to stop and point your phone toward a satellite in order to send a message. Sometimes you have to wait a few minutes for a satellite to come into view. This is not a major issue, but it is a notable difference compared to Garmin devices, which utilize a more robust satellite network and connect more quickly and easily for messaging. Additionally, the iPhone may not function effectively if you experience an accident and are unconscious. While the iPhone has built-in sensors to know when you have had a crash, it will not necessarily be able to reach a satellite if the phone is under you or not pointed in the right direction. In addition, because it does not offer tracking, a friend or search and rescue would not as easily be able to follow your path. On a Garmin device, if you turn on tracking, Search and Rescue would have a much easier time finding you, even if you were in a ravine or under dense tree cover, because they would see a track of where you were likely headed. Battery life is another big downside to the iPhone: many other devices will last for days. Your iPhone will only last a day or two unless you carefully conserve battery life. We recommend carrying an extra battery so you don't find yourself totally cut off from communication if you fail to properly manage your iPhone's charge. Finally, non-emergency text messaging is currently limited to the United States, Canada, and Mexico.

Read more: iPhone Satellite Messaging review

Full Smartphone and Laptop Functionality

Starlink Mini

2-way Messaging?	Yes
Satellite Network	Starlink
Battery Life	Depends on size of external battery
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	No
Measured Weight	38.9 oz

If you're backcountry activity allows the weight and bulk of the Starlink Mini, it offers the ultimate in off-grid connectivity. It works effectively in nearly every part of the world, delivering exceptional internet speeds. The Starlink Roam Plan costs $50 per month for 50GB of data or $165 per month for unlimited use. Compared to the cost of unlimited messaging on most other services, this is a great deal.

The major downside of Starlink is its weight and bulk compared to pocket messengers. While the panel weighs less than three pounds, it is bulky. More importantly, you need to carry an extra battery to power it. The smallest battery we would recommend is the Jackery Explorer 300, which weighs seven pounds. That will only give you about 10-15 hours of Starlink use unless you also have a solar panel. We would recommend at least a 100-watt panel like the Allpowers SPo12 100W Panel, which adds another 6 pounds. That entire setup now weighs approximately 17 pounds, which is way too much for a day adventure. While you could assemble a lighter-weight setup, you would have a lot less power. About the lightest battery and panel set up would be a 100wh battery and 40W solar panel which still weighs about 7-8 pounds and would not give much use when not exposed to direct sunlight such as at night or cloudy weather.

Additionally, it is not practical to perform most activities with Starlink on. You could attach it to your backpack if you are hiking, but we wouldn't recommend having the panel exposed if you are riding a bike, skiing, or traveling in a vehicle. Therefore, it does not offer reliable tracking, which is a key benefit of other trackers. If you are in an emergency, it will take 5-20 minutes to get the Starlink up and running, if you have a clear view of the sky.

Read more: Starlink Mini review

Occasional Activation Bang for the Buck

ACR Bivy Stick

2-way Messaging?	Yes
Satellite Network	Iridium
Battery Life	Up to 120 hours
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	Yes
Measured Weight	3.6 oz

While the ACR Bivy Stick does not have the same messaging convenience as the Garmin models, it is still quite capable. The flexible activation and ever-more-competitive pricing may make it the best value for your intended use.

At the time of testing, if you activate it once a year, the ACR Bivy Stick has one of the lowest 5-year “cost of ownership” measures for global coverage and two-way messaging. Since many will use their wilderness communication device that way, it earns an award among the other value options. If in-device two-way messaging isn't a priority, the Zoleo is another affordable option — know that you need your smartphone and the Zoleo app to compose messages.

Read more: ACR Bivy Stick review

Great Value for SOS Only

Ocean Signal rescueME PLB1

2-way Messaging?	No
Satellite Network	COSPAS/SARSAT
Battery Life	24 hours
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	No
Measured Weight	4.0 oz

If custom messaging is not important to you and you're only looking for an emergency signaling device, the Ocean Signal rescueME PLB1 is your best option. It is expensive upfront, but no annual fees or subscription plans are required. It broadcasts a distress signal through two radio channels, 406 MHz and 121.5 MHz. They are sent to a monitored satellite network and a local aircraft distress frequency. This powerful transmission is sent on the military's reliable COSPAS-SARSAT network.

Unfortunately, this personal locator beacon does not confirm in any way that someone has received your distress signal. The PLB1 is an excellent option for pure, personal locator beacon SOS functions and offers a solid value. Still, the two-way messaging of many other options makes them more useful products overall. If you want more messaging functionality, check out the SPOT X, which has a keyboard on the device.

Read more: Ocean Signal rescueME PLB1 review

Best for Standalone Use

SPOT X

2-way Messaging?	Yes
Satellite Network	Globalstar
Battery Life	240 hours
Passive Tracking (turn on and forget about it - viewers at home can watch your progress on the web)	Yes
Measured Weight	6.8 oz

The SPOT X fills a small niche. This two-way, satellite-linked, backcountry messaging device works entirely on its own. The built-in physical QWERTY keyboard distinguishes it from all of its competitors. This keyboard enables users to text easily without needing a separate, battery-draining device. It can be linked to a smartphone if you prefer a smartphone interface or want that option.

The SPOT X is unique, but it is surpassed in some ways by its close competitors, particularly in terms of size and the satellite system used. Additionally, we had part of the first (of two) SPOT X antennae we tested come apart. Functionality did not change with this issue, but it's not encouraging. These drawbacks are not at all deal breakers. If that physical keyboard and its benefits appeal to you, there is no reason not to choose the SPOT X. If you don't mind spending a bit more, our favorites are the Garmin inReach Messenger and Garmin inReach Mini 2.

Read more: SPOT X review

Why Trust GearLab

We purchased and activated most of the popular beacons and messengers available today. We tested them for hundreds of hours in several distinct situations and locations. We do so while calling on decades of experience with wilderness communications. Test settings have varied through most latitudes, terrains, and climate/vegetation types.

We augmented field tests with consultation and lab tests. We paid special attention to how well the devices performed the most important functions of a messenger/beacon, such as message transmission, signal coverage, and ease of use. We also consulted with SAR experts and engineers who were familiar with the underlying technology. If you're looking for a comprehensive resource to help you find the device that best suits your needs, you've come to the right place.

We tested personal locator beacons using a comprehensive testing plan comprised of five performance metrics:

• SOS/Emergency Messaging (30% of overall score weighting)

• Non-Emergency Messaging (25% weighting)

• Signal Coverage (20% weighting)

• Ease of Use (15% weighting)

• Portability (10% weighting)

Mountain guide Jediah Porter heads up our personal locater beacon review. Aside from testing gear, Jed's primary work is mountain guiding, including rock, ice, alpine, and ski mountaineering trips. Jed guides full-time all around the world. In each of the few most recent years, he has racked up over 500,000 vertical feet of human-powered ascent. In 2020, he ascended 800,000 vertical feet of human-powered mountain terrain, mainly while backcountry skiing. Aside from climbing and skiing, you can find him dabbling in mountain biking, canoeing, hunting, fishing, trail running, and other adventure travel. His latest adventure is in parenting; he and his toddler daughter have logged dozens of nights deep in the backcountry through each of her first three years. He almost always brings a satellite messenger or personal locator beacon along on his adventures, something all his family appreciates. Jed brings professionalism, competence, and experience to test these important safety devices. Before taking over this category, he consulted for one of the major satellite communication network and hardware providers for a few years.

Chris McNamara is GearLab co-founder and has been using satellite messengers for the last decade. These days, his testing is mostly focused on answering the question: “If I am on a two-hour hike or bike in spotty cell service, which is the best option for letting my family know if I will be home on time?” Chris also has three decades of expedition experience and has used these devices in remote locations, from Baffin Island to the Australian Outback.

Analysis and Test Results

It has become increasingly common for wilderness travelers to carry and use satellite communications. You might choose to buck that convention, but your loved ones hope you are at least considering such technology and service. We head to the wild to escape certain types of communication but are also vulnerable to spotty or nonexistent communication options. Strike your balance and use our review findings to make an informed choice.

What's the Best Value?

Note that the initial purchase price is only part of your decision. Some devices may require a significantly higher upfront cost, but when considering the costs of activation and subscription plans, they are closer to or even cheaper over the long haul.

For many people, the best value is often found in using a newer smartphone. iPhone has led the way in offering great non-emergency messaging. Many Android phones now also offer this service.

The best value for SOS/Emergency use is a device on the public-sector/governmental COSPAS-SARSAT network. The ACR devices are two examples. The rescueME PLB1 deserves recognition for its compact size and access to the proven and free international satellite SAR network.

Start-up offerings from Bivy Stick and ZOLEO further increased the subscription options. All of these have low- to no-commitment subscription plans that are equal to or better than those offered by the established competitors. The bigger, older “legacy” contenders are responding with their own flexible, low-commitment subscription options. Finally, larger, mainstream electronics companies (Apple and Motorola, to name two) are entering the satellite communications market and offering their own twists on the subscription/pricing matrix.

Finally, the best value for full internet connectivity, and really the only option we recommend, is the Starlink Mini. No other satellite service is close to offering the performance per dollar.

SOS/Emergency Messaging

For many, sending an emergency signal is the primary reason for carrying a communication device into the wilderness. With varying degrees of effectiveness, these devices can summon help in a life-or-limb emergency. Some of them do nothing more. SAR experts confirm that the most important information to relate is 1) where you are and 2) how bad it is. When you push the SOS button on any reviewed personal locator beacons, you send your GPS coordinates and say, “This is really, really bad.” There was a time, not long ago, when COSPAS-SARSAT-style devices did not include GPS data. The location was determined through a two-stage triangulation process using the communication satellite and SAR aircraft. The uncertainty in a simple “help” notification implies the gravity of the situation. With satellite SOS transmission, you say, “Get here as fast as possible.”

Effective SOS messaging (read: help is summoned, acquired, and helpful) requires a few steps and involves a few key players. First, you need to have a device, a current registration, a clear view of the sky, and the necessary funds and mobility to activate the SOS feature on your device. Don't take these things for granted. Being in an emergency situation is possible without one or more of these essential things in your favor. (A recent test-team visit to the dense forests of the Northeast US pointed out just how tenuous satellite signal can be. We went days at a time without reliable satellite coverage in the otherwise “benign” and compact wilderness of the “civilized” East Coast). The wilderness is dangerous. No piece of equipment will eliminate that danger. For an effective response, your emergency needs to be one that still gives you some time. Satellite communications can be nearly instant, but wilderness emergency response will take hours or days in even the most accessible wild spaces.

Provided your emergency fits the above criteria, your device sends a signal to one of four satellite networks. We review equipment from six different brands, but they all use one of these four satellite networks. Once your distress signal reaches the satellite network, it must be received by a staffed, terrestrial dispatch service. Only six operations provide all monitoring and dispatch services across the 12 devices from the seven brands we tested here. The staff at those services will identify your location and then work to secure local assistance for you. Your message will be methodically funneled to local resources. It is likely that, regardless of how your message is disseminated, the local SAR response will remain the same. This final, crucial, local response depends on too many factors to list here. Do your homework to know your SAR options for any adventure.

SOS messaging says, “I am here and in dire need of assistance.” This is all that SAR needs to know in the worst of emergencies. Of course, being able to relate more nuanced information and answer questions from SAR responders is of great value. Satellite communicators or personal locator beacons that allow two-way, customized communication improve emergency response.

The ACR ResQLink View and rescueME PLB1 use the COSPAS-SARSAT system. Functionally, for emergency messaging, these are identical.

Both SPOT devices, all four Garmin devices, ZOLEO, Motorola Defy, and the Bivy Stick use private networks and emergency dispatch systems. Aside from coverage differences, elaborated below, they work the same for SOS messaging. Of these, only the SPOT Gen4 doesn't allow two-way messaging in any context. With the rest of the aforementioned private sector devices and services, you can text the team back and forth to coordinate your emergency response.

In summary, the Garmin devices, Motorola, ZOLEO, Global Hotspot, Bivy Stick, and SPOT X are the best for emergency messaging since they offer the opportunity to send and receive more nuanced information in an emergency. Additionally, the iPhone features several key Emergency SOS options that can automatically activate in the event of a crash or fall. However, you often need to configure these features in advance, and your ability to connect to satellites often requires holding up your phone and pointing it directly at a satellite.

For “send help now” signaling and nothing more, the Ocean Signal rescueME, ResQLink View, and SPOT Gen4 are nearly indistinguishable and have long been proven to work. Apple's iPhone Emergency Satellite SOS functionality, as long as you are within the coverage area (currently the USA and Canada, with expansion theoretically ongoing), works similarly to two-way devices in that it allows for the sharing of more nuanced information about your emergency.

Non-Emergency Messaging

Regarding non-emergency messaging, various options are available on these devices. Some have features that allow you to text and share your location, giving you the feel of using a smartphone. Others have a more straightforward approach, offering the ability to send a quick message saying that you're okay and where you are. Then, some have no non-emergency messaging options at all. Different devices offer different levels of performance and features. Additionally, some devices come equipped with location tracking capabilities that can be set to share your location and status updates at regular intervals automatically. Finally, one product on the market allows for transmitting photo and voice messages.

There are four major types of non-emergency messaging:
1) Two-way texting with or without location data attached. This is, of course, the most useful.
2) Manual “OK” messages are transmitted, usually with location data attached.
3) Automated tracking. Automated tracking is a function in which the device will send location information to a front country correspondent on some predetermined time interval, signal allowing.
4) The Garmin inReach Messenger Plus allows for sending and receiving photos and short voice memos.

In addition to all the other types of messaging. Various sorts of messaging can go to web interfaces, apps, text messages, and email addresses.

The Garmin GPSMAP 66i provides all the basic forms of non-emergency communication. As does the inReach Mini 2 and Messenger. Similarly, the SPOT X, Bivy Stick, ZOLEO, and Motorola offer all the above forms of non-emergency communication. The SPOT Gen4 has fewer options for non-emergency communications. It features pre-programmed “OK” message functionality, with location data attached, and various tracking mode configurations.

COSPAS-SARSAT personal locator beacons do not offer much in the way of non-emergency communication. The ACR ResQLink View and Ocean Signal rescueME PLB1 provide no explicit non-emergency messaging. That said, through an inexpensive subscription to “406Link,” you can replicate an informal “off-label” non-emergency message protocol. This service leverages a device “test” procedure to send notifications to friends and family, sometimes with location data attached. These “test” messages imply, “I am here, and my device works.” The test message could imply whatever more you and your informal emergency response network determine in advance.

This is nuanced. It is worth noting that ACR once suspended the operation of its 406Link program for years, and their service description explicitly states that it “is not a 'check-in' or 'I'm ok' service.” However, in the same description, ACR implies that it might be used as described above. It is currently operational and, with a full understanding of all the involved parties, could provide a bare-bones sort of non-emergency messaging. Do your further homework on its limitations and functionality.

Apple's iPhone (Model 14 and newer) includes basic two-way texting, location sharing and a number of emergency services (that often require configuring in advance). We love that iPhone messages come from your phone number: you aren't assigned a random new number and you don't have to download a separate app. You also don't have to activate or deactivate a subscription. It just always works as long as you have the right phone and a clear view of the sky.

Among the products and services offering two-way messaging, some of the newest options enable their messaging app to work seamlessly on both satellite signals and cell/WiFi networks. With the apps from ZOLEO, Garmin, Motorola, and Apple, you can have one conversation that moves with you from satellite signal to cell and WiFi. (From Garmin, only the latest devices --Messenger, Messenger Plus, Mini 2, GPSMap 67i-- are compatible with the app that provides seamless messaging. Older devices use an older Garmin app that does not support seamless messaging). This is very nice for smooth communication on trips and for people who frequently go in and out of the wilderness. The SPOT and Bivy Stick apps do not allow sending and receiving messages over cell/WiFi. It might seem minor, but this seamless messaging can greatly smooth communications in certain settings — like international travel or thru-hiking. You're in and out of signal but want to participate in one clean, uninterrupted text chain with someone. The ability to do this has raised the bar regarding what we expect from our satellite messengers; we now wish all of our satellite messenger apps allowed for seamless text chains. Those communicating from home would especially appreciate this; they don't want to jump between messaging apps or contact entries if they don't have to.

Signal Coverage

Each of the four satellite communication networks has coverage limitations, and all satellite communications have inherent restrictions. Additionally, we found differences in the reliable transmission of sent messages, even when coverage seemed intact. Because all remote communications are fraught, communication reliability is greatest when it can be “two-way.” We know from experience with one-way devices that the field user can “ send” messages that no one is getting. When the communications are “two-way,” confirmation of receipt is a little clearer.

For reasons we hope are obvious, we could not and did not test the coverage and effectiveness of SOS messaging. Each device allows a test mode, which does not activate the entire SOS system on any device. Those of us who have not yet had a backcountry emergency have to trust the manufacturers and the experience of other less fortunate users. For these ratings, we rely on research and SAR consultation.

The ResQLink View and rescueME PLB1 use the same network and communication protocol. These can be tested, but the life of a built-in, non-rechargeable battery limits the number of tests. All these “COSPAS-SARSAT” devices confirm functionality with on-device lights. This is limited in its ability to comfort you, as it doesn't involve satellite confirmation. Some also provide rudimentary test procedures that confirm the signal's actual transmission, but this drains the battery and sometimes costs more. Decades of history and anecdotal evidence confirm the global coverage and effectiveness of the COSPAS-SARSAT system that these devices employ. Aside from institutional knowledge and the basic on-device testing we performed, we cannot test the signal coverage of these three emergency-only devices.

The other options are easier to test for range and coverage using their non-emergency communication options. Our goal was to verify manufacturer claims. We found that, by sending non-emergency messages from each, all work as intended. The GlobalStar satellite network used by SPOT brand devices and the iPhone covers an American adventurer's major terrestrial wilderness destinations. Within the limitations of the GlobalStar network, Apple service is limited even more than that of SPOT devices. The inReach, Bivy, and ZOLEO products use the same Iridium satellite network with global coverage. Within the inherent limitations of all satellite communications, these Iridium networked products work everywhere we've tested them, from California beaches to NE forests to Alaskan glaciers to Patagonia cabins.

The latest entry to the market is from Motorola. The Motorola Defy Satellite Link is manufactured by a smaller company called Bullitt. Bullitt licenses the Motorola brand to sell their product. Bullitt also works with Motorola to sell Motorola smartphones with built-in satellite connectivity. We did not test this smartphone. The Bullitt/Motorola products, including the Defy device we tested, use a different satellite network than the one we are accustomed to testing. As noted above, most of our devices use one of three proven, reliable satellite networks. New products, up to this point, have leveraged existing satellite networks. Motorola/Bullitt branch out further. They use a satellite service called Skylo. Skylo is an intermediary that contacts a host of satellite communications hardware providers. This is how we understand Skylo to work: Many private-sector communications satellites are up in the sky. A bunch of them cover the whole world and are owned and run by Iridium. Another whole bunch covers the inhabited latitudes and continents and is owned and run by GlobalStar. Then there are a bunch of individual satellites and smaller networks of satellites at various orbit elevations that serve different purposes and industries. Skylo works with many of these “other” satellite businesses to connect terrestrial Motorola devices with overhead satellites.

One of your Motorola Defy messages might go through a low earth orbit satellite owned by company x. In contrast, the next might go through a geo-stationary, higher satellite owned by company z. Skylo works all that out on the back end. Theoretically, this allows comprehensive coverage. In practice, Motorola/Bullitt and Skylo provide a coverage map on their websites that suggests coverage over all of North America and Europe. We have yet to test Motorola in enough places and contexts to compare the satellite networks we know better thoroughly. The “big three” satellite networks are proven and established, and we have deep institutional knowledge of their coverage and limitations. Skylo is newer. In our decade of testing, we watched one satellite communication “innovation” come and go. Any of these businesses and technologies can come and go, but we have more faith in those that have proven their durability over decades.

We also found subtle differences in message integrity. In a host of head-to-head tests, the Iridium networked devices are faster and more reliable than the GlobalStar devices, even with what should be equal overhead coverage. Different devices, even from different brands but on the same network, had signal speed and integrity that were statistically equal. Again, we found no difference between messages sent or received to and from devices on the same satellite network.

As noted above, satellite connectivity is mainly a function of terrain realities and chosen satellite network. With the introduction of non-emergency satellite messaging to the iPhone we now have also to discuss the ramifications of antenna size. Dedicated devices (like most of what we review here) have relatively large antennae. To include a satellite antenna in a smartphone is to shoehorn it among a great deal of other hardware. The satellite antenna in the iPhone is quite small compared to the other options we review. To optimize the connectivity of that small antenna, the iPhone satellite antenna must be aimed very closely. Other devices do not require this in the same way. The iPhone is equipped with on-screen prompts to help you aim it, but this does add complication and time to your communications. Aiming and connecting to satellites is a big part of texting via satellite with your iPhone. It is a big enough hassle that satellite texting from an iPhone is best considered a rare and novel method of low-frequency, special-circumstance communication. You won't text back and forth as readily with your iPhone as you will with a dedicated device.

Finally, the Starlink Mini works basically everywhere in the world. The speeds have blown us away. You generally need a clear view of the sky. That said, even if you are in the forest, the Starlink will often still work; it will just cut in and out if you are making a video call or streaming a video.

Ease of Use

The combination of setup procedures and in-the-field user interface matters largely determines the ease of use for this equipment. We evaluate both the on-device interface and the included networked app interface. While messaging function and coverage issues are important factors impacting the overall ease of use, we will assess, compare, and rank these factors elsewhere in our review.

Smartphones like the iPhone are usually the easiest to use. You don't have to remember where you put the device (it's probably in your pocket). And you don't have to dedicate time before your adventure to making sure your subscription is current and at the level you need. No additional apps need to be downloaded or firmware updated.

The COSPAS-SARSAT devices — the ResQLink View and rescueME PLB1 — have identical setup procedures. You fill out an online form and await the arrival of your free registration sticker via mail. You can make changes down the road if needed through the online interface.

Setting up the SPOT, Bivy Stick, ZOLEO, Motorola, and Garmin inReach devices are similar. All require you to select and activate a subscription plan. You often have to remember to turn your plan off or downgrade the service after your adventure.

The COSPAS-SARSAT personal locator beacons are super simple to use. For most people in most settings, the device will remain in your emergency kit for years with no changes, maintenance, or deployment required. The batteries are fixed and long-lasting. Few will use the device since the only features are for emergency use. All of these we tested have rudimentary instructions printed on the device. The instructions are accurate and effectively comprehensive.

For SOS use, the SPOT Gen4, SPOT X, inReach Mini 2, ZOLEO, Bivy Stick, Motorola, and Garmin GPSMAP 66i are almost as simple as the COSPAS-SARSAT devices. Activate the SOS mode from either the device or from the app. You can send a pre-programmed “OK Message” from the app of many of the two-way messengers. With the SPOT Gen4, you must send the OK message from the device itself. With inReach, the SPOT X, and ZOLEO, you can send an OK message from the app or the device itself.

Unintentional, undesired triggering of SOS functionality is bad. As in any emergency reporting setting (crime, fire, etc), a “false alarm” has serious repercussions. We don't want to be part of falsely requesting a costly and dangerous emergency response to the wild. Any device/service with an SOS function is vulnerable to false alarms. Parents of toddlers who have somehow called 911 from smartphones know what we are talking about… Because of the severity of an SOS false alarm, we need to consider the technological and physical protection of that SOS trigger. Digital activations (from within messenger apps) require some “two-stage” activation. “Are you sure you want to call for help?”. Physical buttons on most devices have a latched/secured cover for the SOS button.

Most, except for the SOS button on the Motorola Defy. The SOS button of the Motorola Defy is entirely uncovered. The power button and check-in button are also included. If the device is turned on (as it would be when you are texting or tracking. It can also inadvertently be turned on by the exposed power button), the SOS button could be unknowingly pushed or bumped. This is unacceptable. Suitably protecting that SOS button without modification is impossible. Protecting that SOS button, with design and manufacturing, would have been very simple; Motorola included a cover for the USB charging port. Why not include a similar cover for the SOS button? We aren't alone in expressing concern about this potentiality; other online reviews mention the same possibility. We are in the process of testing improvised “solutions” to this potential problem. In the meantime, we cannot recommend using (and couldn't confidently test some functionality) the Motorola Defy Satellite Link. If, through reliable tinkering, third-party parts, or a Motorola/Bullitt aftermarket adaptation, you can gain some confidence in the security of the SOS button, the Motorola should be on your radar. If not, wait until we all get some better information/solutions. Any solution would maintain the compact and light stature of the Defy; it is tiny and light. We like that.

Using the two-way, customizable messaging attribute of the Garmin Mini 2, Messenger, and GPSMAP, SPOT X, Bivy Stick, ZOLEO, or Global Hotspot requires further effort but is well worth it. Sending customized messages directly from the inReach devices is slow but works. None of the other two-way messengers can send or view messages without the app. On any of these devices, sending customized messages from the app is far more user-friendly than the on-device messaging of the inReach satellite messengers. In this context, using your smartphone's familiar keyboard leverages the best attributes of the inReach, Bivy, and ZOLEO options. The SPOT X is usable with its app or entirely stand-alone. The device has a built-in, physical QWERTY keyboard. This makes it the easiest two-way texting device to use. The ZOLEO and Bivy Stick do not allow users to customize non-emergency texting without a smartphone. With the ZOLEO, Bivy Stick, you can still send a basic “I'm ok” message if you lose the function of your cell phone. Ensure your at-home team understands what this means before your travels. Sending messages from either inReach device is tedious but doable in a pinch.

Bluetooth connectivity and reliance on smartphone apps introduce a potential failure mode to your backcountry communication system. All three Garmin devices, Bivy Stick, SPOT X, and ZOLEO have Bluetooth and app connectivity to your phone. As you know from routine smartphone use, Bluetooth and apps inherently have potential issues. This baseline of potential unreliability is uniform across the board and is exaggerated by backcountry communication realities. Apps can be deleted from your phone, and Bluetooth connections can be “forgotten.” You cannot re-download a lost app away from WiFi and cellular data in the wild. If the app relies on a web-confirmed account “login” and that “login” is interrupted, you can't reconnect in the wild. What have we found when comparing this “digital reliability” across app-enabled devices?

First, assuming that the likelihood of app failure is never zero, we will look at the consequences. The SPOT X is the best if you lose your app functionality. It has a large screen and a full QWERTY keyboard. The next best are all the Garmin devices. With all three of the Garmins we tested, you can perform all of the functions, albeit slowly and on smaller screens. The Bivy Stick allows you to trigger SOS, send a check-in message, and activate tracking without the app. All texting requires a smartphone. ZOLEO allows SOS activation and sends a check-in message to the device.

Next, what about the likelihood of an issue? First, we had no spontaneous app/device connection failures in our testing. All our testing was intentional “sabotage,” if you will, of the connection. The Bluetooth/app connection of the ZOLEO is robust. The only way we could get it to fail was to make a multi-step, in-signal process of “delete app account.” All Garmin products behave similarly. Bluetooth connection can be interrupted but regained in the wild. If you log out of either of the Garmin apps, you need WiFi or cellular to log back in. Though we haven't experienced it, we have read reports from other users of backcountry failure of Garmin app login, resulting in reliance on the on-device functionality alone. The relative likelihood of app/Bluetooth failure is hard to ascertain, as there are many more user hours on the Garmins than on the others. The bottom line is that the few failed inReach/app connection accounts aren't enough to draw any real conclusions from.

Portability

Visiting the wilderness typically requires packing light. Therefore, the portability of your communications device(s) is important. Portability, for our purposes, is a function of weight and bulk.

[charid=Measured Weight]

The Garmin GPSMAP 66i is large compared to most devices we tested, but it also does much more than others. We didn't mind the bulk until the inReach Mini came along. The Mini is less than half the size of the GPSMAP and does nearly as much. The inReach Mini 2 is the same size and shape as the original Mini and performs all the essential functions of the larger device. The Bivy Stick is about the same size and weight as the Mini 2, and the inReach Messenger is slightly heavier.

The ResQLink View is heavier than the inReach Mini 2 and Bivy Stick and does little more than the ultra-tiny OceanSignal PLB1. The Global Hotspot and ZOLEO are almost as portable as the Mini 2. The SPOT X is similar in size and weight to the Garmin GPSMAP 66i. The SPOT Gen4 is about the same size and weight as the Mini 2 or Bivy Stick. Notably, the SPOT Gen4 is slightly heavier than the Gen3, which is odd. We normally expect newer products, especially products with fewer functions, to be smaller than their predecessors.

You will likely have a smartphone with you on your outdoor adventures. If that smartphone is an iPhone 14 or newer or some newer Android phones, you already have emergency satellite communication and a form of rudimentary non-emergency communication. This is perhaps the ultimate in “portability,” as sat comms are built into your ever-present pocket computer.

The Motorola Defy Satellite Link is tiny and light. It is less than half the bulk of its nearest competitor and only slightly more than half its weight. We like this. This is a very portable piece of equipment, provided you can secure a cover for the SOS button (as described above) without appreciably adding to its weight and bulk.

The bulkiest option in our test is the Starlink Mini. Although it weighs only a few pounds, it is significantly larger than the competition and requires a battery and a solar panel. That said, the Mini is roughly the size of a Frisbee compared to the larger Starlink options, which are more the size of a pizza box, including a modem.

Conclusion

The satellite communicator market is ever-evolving and we look forward to bringing you the latest backcountry communication devices.