I can't find a single third-party, real-world review of that online. There are a few youtube videos and a bunch of "articles" in outdoorsy type websites that are nothing more than a rehashed (or word-for-word reprint) press-release published by the company itself.
What I did find is that the Telecoms hate it and are fighting to prevent the FCC from really implementing it. By that metric alone, it sounds like it's a fantastic technology if you ask me!!
Here's an article from last year about the FCC and permitting this new device.
https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/tel ... or-takeoff
The device uses a flip-up antenna that communicates with Intelsat Galaxy satellites in geostationary orbits. These are nearly 50 times further out than the Iridium satellites used by today’s satphones, so the SatPaq needs a powerful signal to connect. It’s that strong signal—smack in the middle of the C-band microwave spectrum used for voice and data communications in rural areas and for national networks—that has many telecoms companies worried. In a submission to the FCC, CenturyLink called Higher Grounds’ plans “a recipe for disaster” and a “potential interference to each and every…link of the [microwave] network throughout the country.”
For its part, Higher Ground claims a robust system of ‘self-coordination’ that makes the chance of interference almost negligible. The SatPaq app ... selects a non-interfering frequency ... then uses the phone’s compass to ensure that the flip-up antenna is pointed directly at the satellite, and not towards a fixed station. If the system cannot find a safe combination of frequency and direction, it will not transmit.
I'd be curious to know how much interference there is out there, if it's more likely in some areas than others, times of day, etc.
If it's as reliable as a SPOT or InReach, then I think this may be a very interesting competitor in a new segment of the market.
Edit: I see that it communicates with only TWO satellites. Both are over the equator, one of which is at the equivalent longitude of Louisiana, and the other longitudinally between California and Hawaii. While this seems to be extremely limited compared to SPOT or InReach satellite constellations, the SatPaq satellites are 50x farther away, meaning you if you can see the sky, you should have a much better chance at seeing one of the satellites. Nonetheless, I can think of plenty of times when I have a great view of the sky above me, but can't see the sun, even during the day. So I can see there being plenty of times where you can't get line of sight to either of those satellites if you're in even moderately mountainous terrain, and certainly in a canyon that isn't facing specifically toward the equator at either of those two longitudes.
edit 2: I have, on several occasions, tried to align a DirecTV dish to the geostationary satellite somewhere over the vicinity of south Texas. Especially if you move farther north in the US, the angle required to connect to that satellite becomes very problematic if there are trees. Even with a clear sky overhead, it was often difficult to find a clearing toward the southern sky. Since these two satellites are at the same altitude (that's what makes it geostationary) I'd expect it to be very similar. You will need an unobstructed view of the southern sky, either toward Louisiana, or the Pacific. Being in Arizona, we have a better angle than northern states, but even so, I think it's going to be challenging in wooded or mountainous terrain.