nospam wrote:

> the reasons are well known (apis changed) and the demand is
> insufficient to bother writing new ones. this is particularly true with
> modern wifi base stations that can auto-configure themselves in a mesh
> configuration (or even solo).

I think it's interesting that you lie that the "demand is insufficient"
given there are more Android "Wi-Fi Signal Strength" apps than I want to
count (which, if you don't know this, then it's not a lie - it's ignorance).
<https://play.google.com/store/search?q=wi-fi%20signal%20strength&c=apps>

Either you lied.
Or you're stupid.
(Pick one)

What makes you an iKook, nospam, are the confluence of three traits:
a. You derive all your self esteem from supposed Apple capability
b. And yet, you lack the education to realize Apple lied to you
c. Worse, you lack the IQ to even comprehend what "signal strength" is

You _still_ think megabits per second are the same as decibels, nospam.
We covered this in detail _years_ ago - and you still haven't learned.

That's how I know your IQ can't be even close to what is an average IQ.
And I know you have low self esteem by the way you fabricate iOS apps.

None of the iOS apps you fabricate exist, let alone _can_ exist.
You are literally too ignorant about coding to even realize that fact.

On Android, the demand is _huge_ as there are _plenty_ of apps for that.
<https://i.postimg.cc/fLC4zcm6/wifi04.jpg> Many signal strength apps

Either way, you iKooks _hate_ that iOS is always so very crippled by Apple.
> that said, there's nothing preventing anyone from writing a super-fancy
> graphical display, other than there's no return on investment, making
> it not particularly attractive.

Yes there is.
You simply own too low of an IQ to realize why they don't exist on iOS.

This thread is proof of two facts I've learned about you iKooks:
a. Jolly Roger and Alan Baker own an IQ that is no higher than 40.
b. People like nospam are no higher than double that of those two.

None of you even know the difference between a decibel & a megabit/second.
--
I've never met people as abysmally stupid as these iKooks always are.

On 2022-03-19, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On 2022-03-19 15:00:32 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>>>>>>> So that's built-in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Works great.
>>>>
>>>>> How did you get running graphs for each nearby ap?
>>>>
>>>> I think that's only in Android.
>>>
>>> How did the first two posters get the running graphs in iOS then?
>>
>> You mean with Wi-Fi Sweetspots?:
>>
>> <https://apps.apple.com/us/app/wi-fi-sweetspots/id855457383?uo=4&at=11l6hc&app=itunes&ct=fnd>
>
> Where's the running graph?

The first and second screenshots show a running graph. It's also shown
in the video Arlen posted:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QaABa6DFIo&feature=youtu.be>

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2022-03-19 21:54:12 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

>> Where's the running graph?
>
> The first and second screenshots show a running graph. It's also shown
> in the video Arlen posted:
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QaABa6DFIo&feature=youtu.be>

Does anyone else (like nospam maybe?) confirm what you are saying?

In article <t16a2p$jpe$1@dont-email.me>, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:

> >> Where's the running graph?
> >
> > The first and second screenshots show a running graph. It's also shown
> > in the video Arlen posted:
> >
> > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QaABa6DFIo&feature=youtu.be>
>
> Does anyone else (like nospam maybe?) confirm what you are saying?

that video does show a running graph, however, it's not signal strength.

it's very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
wants, moving or static.

On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On 2022-03-19 21:54:12 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>>> Where's the running graph?
>>
>> The first and second screenshots show a running graph. It's also
>> shown in the video Arlen posted:
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QaABa6DFIo&feature=youtu.be>
>
> Does anyone else (like nospam maybe?) confirm what you are saying?

The fuck? I downloaded Wi-Fi Sweetspots years ago and can confirm that
it shows a running graph from first-hand experience. And so could you if
you othered to install the app yourself. You don't need other people to
tell you anything about the app. It's a free app you can install in a
few seconds and run yourself. Are you just trolling?

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2022-03-20, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <t16a2p$jpe$1@dont-email.me>, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>
>> >> Where's the running graph?
>> >
>> > The first and second screenshots show a running graph. It's also
>> > shown in the video Arlen posted:
>> >
>> > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QaABa6DFIo&feature=youtu.be>
>>
>> Does anyone else (like nospam maybe?) confirm what you are saying?
>
> that video does show a running graph, however, it's not signal
> strength.

Correct - it's throughput (bandwidth), but it's a running graph and as
you walk around your house, you cam see how it changes according to your
distance from the router.

> it's very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
> wants, moving or static.

Of course.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 3/16/2022 2:26 PM, Alan wrote:

<snip>

> <https://www.techadvisor.com/how-to/network-wifi/check-wi-fi-signal-strength-3803538/>
>
>
> So that's built-in.

You can't equate the Airport Utility, or "Wi-Fi Sweetspots" with an
Android App like Wi-Fi Analyzer
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.farproc.wifi.analyzer>.
The differences are stark.

I watched that video that was mentioned and whoever made it doesn't
understand the reality of what is required in such an app, and was just
making the video in an attempt to...well you know what it was an attempt
to do.

If someone really needs to be configuring Wi-Fi networks for optimal
performance (and few people have that need) then they can just buy a
cheap Android device that supports ac, n, g, a, and b, and use the
Wi-Fi Analyzer App.

For $60 you can buy a Samsung A03s to use, without cellular service, for
various Android apps for which there is no iOS equivalent. No Wi-Fi 6
(ax) on the lower cost phones yet, so if that's an issue you're up
around $300 unless you buy a refurbished phone (like one from the
Samsung Galaxy S10 family). We have two phones in the houses with
802.11ax, an iPhone SE2020 and a Samsung Galaxy S10E.

I recall when I was contracting for a company manufacturing complex
devices that used a GPS receiver inside. Because we could not use
external antennas, getting a GPS fix could take a while. Setup for the
device was faster if you could input the NMEA data when you received it
so we wrote an Android App for setup. Unfortunately, iOS doesn't allow
apps that provide the NMEA data so we could not do an iOS version of the
App despite repeated requests. The solution was to include a cheap
Android phone to run the app. At the time you could buy a locked
Tracfone device for around $20, and the device we sold was expensive
enough that $20 was not an issue. It would never be activated but it was
only needed to run Android apps not connect to a cellular network.

In article <t17nf6$pu4$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> If someone really needs to be configuring Wi-Fi networks for optimal
> performance (and few people have that need)

supply and demand. developers have better and more lucrative things to
do than write an app few people need.

> then they can just buy a
> cheap Android device that supports ac, n, g, a, and b, and use the
> Wi-Fi Analyzer App.

no need, since modern wifi access points self-configure themselves, in
particular, the mesh units.

On 2022-03-20 10:50:30 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

>> that video does show a running graph, however, it's not signal
>> strength.
>
> Correct - it's throughput (bandwidth), but it's a running graph and as
> you walk around your house, you cam see how it changes according to your
> distance from the router.

Why did you say it showed a wifi signal strength graph if it didn't do that?

>
>> it's very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
>> wants, moving or static.
>
> Of course.

What app?

On 2022-03-20 07:48:59 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

> The fuck? I downloaded Wi-Fi Sweetspots years ago and can confirm that
> it shows a running graph from first-hand experience.

Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it didn't?

> And so could you if
> you othered to install the app yourself.
> You don't need other people to
> tell you anything about the app. It's a free app you can install in a
> few seconds and run yourself.

I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it did.

nospam wrote:

> supply and demand. developers have better and more lucrative things to
> do than write an app few people need.

Why are you iKooks always making inane excuses for why Apple crippled iOS?

Why are there so many Wi-Fi & Cellular graphical debuggers on Android?
Why are there _zero_ iOS signal strength graphical WiFi/cellular debuggers?

You do not know why.
I do.

HINT: It's not the developers.

>> then they can just buy a
>> cheap Android device that supports ac, n, g, a, and b, and use the
>> Wi-Fi Analyzer App.
>
> no need, since modern wifi access points self-configure themselves, in
> particular, the mesh units.

Why are there _zero_ iOS signal strength graphical WiFi/cellular debuggers?

I know why.
You don't.

HINT: It's not the hardware.
--
I don't care iKooks are child-like with a low-IQ & no education & low self
esteem; but due to that, they're so confident in always being dead wrong.

On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On 2022-03-20 07:48:59 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>> The fuck? I downloaded Wi-Fi Sweetspots years ago and can confirm
>> that it shows a running graph from first-hand experience.
>
> Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it
> didn't?

No, I didn't say that. You asked where people in this thread were
showing running graphs, and I pointed out the app that was showing
running graphs. And I also readily confirmed nospam's reply that the app
shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
strength afterward.

>> And so could you if you othered to install the app yourself. You
>> don't need other people to tell you anything about the app. It's a
>> free app you can install in a few seconds and run yourself.
>
> I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it did.

You must be confusing me with someone else, because I never said it
showed signal strength.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On 2022-03-20 10:50:30 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>>> that video does show a running graph, however, it's not signal
>>> strength.
>>
>> Correct - it's throughput (bandwidth), but it's a running graph and
>> as you walk around your house, you cam see how it changes according
>> to your distance from the router.
>
> Why did you say it showed a wifi signal strength graph if it didn't do
> that?

The real question is why you are claiming I said something I never said,
when anyone here can easily go back and look to see I never claimed the
app showed a signal strength graph? Stop with the lies, please.

>>> it's very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
>>> wants, moving or static.
>>
>> Of course.
>
> What app?

The WiFi Sweetspots app mentioned several times in this thread by others
before I reminded you of it seems to show a graph of what it wants quite
easily. It just happens to be a graph of network throughput rather than
raw signal strength, which I happen to think is just as (if not more)
useful.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2022-03-20 14:07:58 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

>> Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it
>> didn't?
>
> No, I didn't say that. You asked where people in this thread were
> showing running graphs, and I pointed out the app that was showing
> running graphs.

Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
running graph of the iPhone accelerometer values would have been.

> shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
> strength afterward.

Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
running graph of the battery charge capacity would have been.

>>> And so could you if you othered to install the app yourself. You
>>> don't need other people to tell you anything about the app. It's a
>>> free app you can install in a few seconds and run yourself.
>>
>> I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it did.
>
> You must be confusing me with someone else, because I never said it
> showed signal strength.

Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
running graph of the temperature of the iPhone would have been.

On 2022-03-20 14:12:46 +0000, Jolly Roger said:

>> Why did you say it showed a wifi signal strength graph if it didn't do
>> that?
>
> The real question is why you are claiming I said something I never said,
> when anyone here can easily go back and look to see I never claimed the
> app showed a signal strength graph? Stop with the lies, please.

Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
running graph of the iPhone storage capacity would have been.

>>>> it's very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
>>>> wants, moving or static.
>>>
>>> Of course.
>>
>> What app?
>
> The WiFi Sweetspots app mentioned several times in this thread by others
> before I reminded you of it seems to show a graph of what it wants quite
> easily. It just happens to be a graph of network throughput rather than
> raw signal strength, which I happen to think is just as (if not more)
> useful.

If it's "very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
wants" then what app shows a running graph of ap's wifi signal strength?

In article <t18829$5qn$1@dont-email.me>, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:

> > shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
> > strength afterward.
>
> Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
> running graph of the battery charge capacity would have been.

throughput is directly correlated to wifi rssi (and s/n).

battery charge is not, nor is motion or temperature, the other two
things you mentioned.

In article <t188c4$bt9$1@dont-email.me>, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:

>
> If it's "very easy for an app to show a graph of whatever data source it
> wants" then what app shows a running graph of ap's wifi signal strength?

the usual trolls have claimed that such an app is impossible on ios
because apple prohibits it. that claim is false.

On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On 2022-03-20 14:07:58 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>>> Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it
>>> didn't?
>>
>> No, I didn't say that. You asked where people in this thread were
>> showing running graphs, and I pointed out the app that was showing
>> running graphs.
>
> Your running graph

As I pointed out in my very first post about it, the graph is from an
app that was previously mentioned in this thread and is not written by
me and is no way "mine". Sorry if you are easily confused, but that's
the truth..

>> shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
>> strength afterward.
>
> Your running graph

It ain't mine, and it was previously mentioned by someone else in the
thread - not me.

>>>> And so could you if you othered to install the app yourself. You
>>>> don't need other people to tell you anything about the app. It's a
>>>> free app you can install in a few seconds and run yourself.
>>>
>>> I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it
>>> did.
>>
>> You must be confusing me with someone else, because I never said it
>> showed signal strength.
>
> Your running graph

*YAWN*

You're just trolling at this point. Boring. Feel free to continue on
your own. I'm sure you'll gleefully throw a petty, little Last Word
party in my honor, and you should definitely do whatever makes you feel
better. Laterz.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On 2022-03-20 14:12:46 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>>> Why did you say it showed a wifi signal strength graph if it didn't
>>> do that?
>>
>> The real question is why you are claiming I said something I never
>> said, when anyone here can easily go back and look to see I never
>> claimed the app showed a signal strength graph? Stop with the lies,
>> please.
>
> Your running graph

It ain't mine, nor was I the first to mention it in this thread, bone
head.

> was no more related to wifi signal strength

As nospam mentioned, throughput is definitely correlated to signal
strength.

> than a running graph of the iPhone storage capacity would have been.

It's definitely more related than that. You're not too bright, are you?

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

On Mar 20, 2022 at 4:50:14 PM PDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>> On 2022-03-20 14:12:46 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>>
>>>> Why did you say it showed a wifi signal strength graph if it didn't
>>>> do that?
>>>
>>> The real question is why you are claiming I said something I never
>>> said, when anyone here can easily go back and look to see I never
>>> claimed the app showed a signal strength graph? Stop with the lies,
>>> please.
>>
>> Your running graph
>
> It ain't mine, nor was I the first to mention it in this thread, bone
> head.
>
>> was no more related to wifi signal strength
>
> As nospam mentioned, throughput is definitely correlated to signal
> strength.
>
>> than a running graph of the iPhone storage capacity would have been.
>
> It's definitely more related than that. You're not too bright, are you?

Just so we know who the bone heads are and aren't, I've been using gtr (it's
short for guitar) for 12-15 years on usenet. and I'm not whoever this bonehead
is who's copped my login.

On Mar 20, 2022 at 2:58:37 PM PDT, "gtr" <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:

> On 2022-03-20 14:07:58 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>
>>> Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it
>>> didn't?
>>
>> No, I didn't say that. You asked where people in this thread were
>> showing running graphs, and I pointed out the app that was showing
>> running graphs.
>
> Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
> running graph of the iPhone accelerometer values would have been.
>
>> shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
>> strength afterward.
>
> Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
> running graph of the battery charge capacity would have been.
>
>>>> And so could you if you othered to install the app yourself. You
>>>> don't need other people to tell you anything about the app. It's a
>>>> free app you can install in a few seconds and run yourself.
>>>
>>> I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it did.
>>
>> You must be confusing me with someone else, because I never said it
>> showed signal strength.
>
> Your running graph was no more related to wifi signal strength than a
> running graph of the temperature of the iPhone would have been.

I can't imagine what utility there is in camoflaging yourself in my ID (gtr
xxx@yyy.zzz).

On Mar 20, 2022 at 4:47:53 PM PDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>> On 2022-03-20 14:07:58 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>>
>>>> Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it
>>>> didn't?
>>>
>>> No, I didn't say that. You asked where people in this thread were
>>> showing running graphs, and I pointed out the app that was showing
>>> running graphs.
>>
>> Your running graph
>
> As I pointed out in my very first post about it, the graph is from an
> app that was previously mentioned in this thread and is not written by
> me and is no way "mine". Sorry if you are easily confused, but that's
> the truth..
>
>>> shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
>>> strength afterward.
>>
>> Your running graph
>
> It ain't mine, and it was previously mentioned by someone else in the
> thread - not me.
>
>>>>> And so could you if you othered to install the app yourself. You
>>>>> don't need other people to tell you anything about the app. It's a
>>>>> free app you can install in a few seconds and run yourself.
>>>>
>>>> I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it
>>>> did.
>>>
>>> You must be confusing me with someone else, because I never said it
>>> showed signal strength.
>>
>> Your running graph
>
> *YAWN*
>
> You're just trolling at this point. Boring. Feel free to continue on
> your own. I'm sure you'll gleefully throw a petty, little Last Word
> party in my honor, and you should definitely do whatever makes you feel
> better. Laterz.

Yes, trolling under a false ID. What a dipshit.

On 2022-03-21, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2022 at 4:47:53 PM PDT, "Jolly Roger" <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-03-20, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>>> On 2022-03-20 14:07:58 +0000, Jolly Roger said:
>>>
>>>>> Why did you say it showed wifi signal strength when nospam said it
>>>>> didn't?
>>>>
>>>> No, I didn't say that. You asked where people in this thread were
>>>> showing running graphs, and I pointed out the app that was showing
>>>> running graphs.
>>>
>>> Your running graph
>>
>> As I pointed out in my very first post about it, the graph is from an
>> app that was previously mentioned in this thread and is not written by
>> me and is no way "mine". Sorry if you are easily confused, but that's
>> the truth..
>>
>>>> shows a running graph of network throughput as opposed to signal
>>>> strength afterward.
>>>
>>> Your running graph
>>
>> It ain't mine, and it was previously mentioned by someone else in the
>> thread - not me.
>>
>>>>>> And so could you if you othered to install the app yourself. You
>>>>>> don't need other people to tell you anything about the app. It's a
>>>>>> free app you can install in a few seconds and run yourself.
>>>>>
>>>>> I read what the app does and the app doesn't do what you said it
>>>>> did.
>>>>
>>>> You must be confusing me with someone else, because I never said it
>>>> showed signal strength.
>>>
>>> Your running graph
>>
>> *YAWN*
>>
>> You're just trolling at this point. Boring. Feel free to continue on
>> your own. I'm sure you'll gleefully throw a petty, little Last Word
>> party in my honor, and you should definitely do whatever makes you feel
>> better. Laterz.
>
> Yes, trolling under a false ID. What a dipshit.

The writing style has "Arlen" written all over it.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

Am 21.03.22 um 12:44 schrieb Jolly Roger:
> On 2022-03-21, gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> wrote:
>> Yes, trolling under a false ID. What a dipshit.
>
> The writing style has "Arlen" written all over it.

It took you a while ...

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Jolly Roger wrote:

> On 2022-03-16, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>>
>> 'How to check Wi-Fi signal strength on an iPhone
>>
>> Install the AirPort Utility from the App Store.
>>
>> Open the Settings app and scroll down until you see Airport Utility. Tap
>> on it, then tap Wi-Fi Scanner to enable this feature.
>>
>> How to check Wi-Fi signal strength
>>
>> Now run AirPort Utility and you should see a blue Wi-Fi scan option at
>> the top-right. Tap Scan and you�ll see all the Wi-Fi networks in range
>> of your iPhone.
>>
>> How to check Wi-Fi signal strength
>>
>> As continuous scan is the default, the values will change over time. You
>> can adjust the Scan Duration slider so the results only update for the
>> period you set.
>>
>> Look at the RSSI value of your own network (which may not be top of the
>> list) and check the value.'
>>
>><https://www.techadvisor.com/how-to/network-wifi/check-wi-fi-signal-strength-3803538/>
>>
>> So that's built-in.
>
> Works great.

On the original topic of wifi scanners, it's telling that the dumbest iOS
iKooks (Snit, Alan Baker & Jolly Roger) _still_ don't know the difference
between a megabit and a decibel (even after all these years).

They would be hilarious if they all weren't so sadly shockingly stupid.

The fact remains Apple's app store has _zero_ graphical wi-fi ap debuggers.
And the fact remains the app store has _zero_ graphical cellular debuggers.

Why the iKooks think otherwise is due to a confluence of three traits:
a. They are _desperate_ to garner "self esteem" from Apple "superiority"
b. Yet they have too low of an IQ to realize the functionality isn't there
c. Worse, they have no education at all so they fabricate that it exists
--
Note that it's mostly that the iKooks are _desperate_ to garner self esteem
from the supposed superiority of clearly grossly inferior Apple products.