The fact that they said this burns up when it runs out of "juice" implies that it is in very low Earth orbit, where the atmosphere still exists and imparts drag. These will reenter the atmosphere on a moderately predictable time scale and burn up. Space junk is only a problem at higher orbits which can be stable for very long periods of time without propellant.
As for 2... they put on up and it worked. What's the point of theorizing about how it might not work, when they've already done it? It might stand up to a good solar blast, but that's hardly a surprise, and if it's disposably cheap, who cares?
the phone itself might be cheap, but putting it up there is most certainly not (yet)...which is why most things that are designed to go into orbit are expensive :(
would you care to spend 150k+ to put a $300 cell phone into space for 2 weeks?
i think as long as launches are limited, the asking price will be kept artificially high anyways to render the cost of the actual satellite minimal compared to the launch expenses, regardless if it's $300 or $300,000 going up.
Although space is cold, due to the vacuum the biggest issue is getting heat away from the devices. That's why the main part of EVA suits is liquid cooling.
> radiation of space without being using radiation hardened silicon
They are only in low earth orbit, so the magnetic field of the earth would provide pretty good protection.
2. I heard somewhere that the batteries needed to be replaced but not much else did, don't have a reliable source for that though
http://www.nasa.gov/directorates/heo/home/CubeSats_initiativ...
There is significant interest in these small units (10cm on a side, but combinable up to 6 units) on the part of universities. Here's a list of the upcoming launches:
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2013-073
I think that within NASA CubeSats are regarded with limited interest. The conventional route for a new satellite measurement from the lab to space is via airborne, or in some cases balloon-borne, experiments. That's how, say, new radar, lidar, hyperspectral imaging, etc., technologies are proven. Lab bench, field experiments, airplane, space.
http://amsat-uk.org/2013/04/26/ham-radio-cubesats-successful...
1. isnt this small enough to look like space debris, and maybe dangerous?
2. "The mobile phones are designed to be thrown around the room and for people to drop them in water. They're really robust bits of technology," -- i'm not sure how this physical durability has any bearing on its performance in near absolute-zero temps and in the radiation of space without being using radiation hardened silicon...not to mention that it would never be subjected to any of the things described.