There are apps which report the exact cell tower that you're connected to
at any given moment but which of the identifiers that these apps provide
tells me the exact cell tower and sector antenna unique identifier?

The stress of this question is on the word "unique" since just knowing the
cell tower location in an Internet lookup database is not as useful as
knowing the exact identifier for the exact sector antenna connection.

This is an example of the sets of numbers which these apps report.
https://mobiletechtalk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019-11-01-12.42.46.jpg

There is a mobile tower TAC, PCI, ECI & EARFCN reported by these apps.

What is the minimum combination of those identifiers that is exactly the
unique sector antenna the phone is currently connected to?

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> There are apps which report the exact cell tower that you're connected
> to at any given moment but which of the identifiers that these apps
> provide tells me the exact cell tower and sector antenna unique
> identifier?
>
> The stress of this question is on the word "unique" since just
> knowing the cell tower location in an Internet lookup database is not
> as useful as knowing the exact identifier for the exact sector
> antenna connection.

Network Cell Info (by M2Catalyst)
free: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite
paid: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfo

I have the paid/Pro version, so I cannot say what crippling is present
in the free version. I used the free version for 2 years, and
eventually decided to pay ($1.99) for it along with some other freebies
that I decided to keep after a long trial. They have a features
comparison table at:

https://www.m2catalyst.com/features

Unless you understand the data presented in the app (I don't know a lot
of what it shows), it may be hard to figure out which are the
indentifiers you are looking for. There is so much data presented to
you that you'll be spending lots of time online to learn lots.

It doesn't use a database for tower lookup. It shows you to which tower
you are current connected, and even has a map to show you where they are
besides giving you the GPS coordinates of the tower. GPS is not using
your smartphone, but part of the signal they send to you; i.e., the
towers tell you where they are. That's how accurate tracking works in
Android assuming you don't disable the GPS radio.

Warning: The app will tend to stay loaded when you close its window for
the paid versions. That's because the paid versions do measurements in
the background. When you truly want the app to unload, click the Off
button (circle with a 12 o'clock tick mark).

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:29:05 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> It doesn't use a database for tower lookup. It shows you to which tower
> you are current connected

That's what I like about these apps. They're actual unique connections.

What I don't know is what "set" of identifiers "is" the minimum to identify
the tower unique antenna sector.

Certainly, in the example given, this is the unique sector antenna.
https://mobiletechtalk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019-11-01-12.42.46.jpg

TAC = 35088
PCI = 349
ECI = 129457524(505693-116)
EARFCN = 39250

But what do those mean in terms of the cell tower unique identifier?

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:29:05 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> It doesn't use a database for tower lookup. It shows you to which tower
>> you are current connected
>
> That's what I like about these apps. They're actual unique connections.
>
> What I don't know is what "set" of identifiers "is" the minimum to identify
> the tower unique antenna sector.
>
> Certainly, in the example given, this is the unique sector antenna.
> https://mobiletechtalk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019-11-01-12.42.46.jpg
>
> TAC = 35088
> PCI = 349
> ECI = 129457524(505693-116)
> EARFCN = 39250
>
> But what do those mean in terms of the cell tower unique identifier?

That's technical information that you have to research to understand.
The apps expect users to know the technical jargon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Allocation_Code
https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:940787/FULLTEXT01.pdf
https://www.hawkanalytics.com/a-simple-guide-to-understanding-cell-site-terminology-when-mapping-cellular-call-detail-records/
https://www.cablefree.net/wirelesstechnology/4glte/lte-carrier-frequency-earfcn/

There are many sites for cellular technology training, too, like to
prepare for certifications. As with such training programs, they aren't
free. Trying to self-educate through the Web is, well, sketchy.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 13:27:19 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:29:05 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> It doesn't use a database for tower lookup. It shows you to which tower
>>> you are current connected
>>
>> That's what I like about these apps. They're actual unique connections.
>>
>> What I don't know is what "set" of identifiers "is" the minimum to identify
>> the tower unique antenna sector.
>>
>> Certainly, in the example given, this is the unique sector antenna.
>> https://mobiletechtalk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019-11-01-12.42.46.jpg
>>
>> TAC = 35088
>> PCI = 349
>> ECI = 129457524(505693-116)
>> EARFCN = 39250
>>
>> But what do those mean in terms of the cell tower unique identifier?
>
> That's technical information that you have to research to understand.
> The apps expect users to know the technical jargon.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Allocation_Code
> https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:940787/FULLTEXT01.pdf
> https://www.hawkanalytics.com/a-simple-guide-to-understanding-cell-site-terminology-when-mapping-cellular-call-detail-records/
> https://www.cablefree.net/wirelesstechnology/4glte/lte-carrier-frequency-earfcn/
>
> There are many sites for cellular technology training, too, like to
> prepare for certifications. As with such training programs, they aren't
> free. Trying to self-educate through the Web is, well, sketchy.

As shown in this example, every phone can report where it is and exactly
what sector antenna on what tower by what carrier it is connected to.
https://i.ibb.co/kHMpDBn/Screenshot-2021-05-16-14-38-14-934-make-more-r2d2-cellular-z.jpg

MY LOC = 60.384528/56.850208
Serving Cell TAC = 26566
Serving Cell PCI = 31
Serving Cell ECI = 170572549(666299-5)
Serving Cell EARFCN = 3300/21300
Serving Cell FREQ = 2675/2555
Serving Cell BAND = 7(FDD)
My current RSRP = -99 dBm

As compared to this phone which also knows all that same identifying data.
https://mobiletechtalk.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/2019-11-01-12.42.46.jpg

MY LOC = -3.247542/55.976644
Serving Cell TAC = 35088
Serving Cell PCI = 349
Serving Cell ECI = 129457524(505693-116)
Serving Cell BANDWIDTH = 5 MHz
Serving Cell EARFCN = 39250
Serving Cell FREQ = 2360 MHz
Serving Cell BAND = 40(TDD)
My current RSRP = -93 dBm

I was hoping others would know this already so looking each of those
indicators up to better understand which are the minimum unique set.
https://www.hawkanalytics.com/a-simple-guide-to-understanding-cell-site-terminology-when-mapping-cellular-call-detail-records/

The TAC is the Type Allocation Code.
Used to create the first 8 digits of the International Mobile Equipment
Identity (IMEI), the number that identifies each unique mobile device on
all gsm networks.

The PCI is the Physical Cell Id.
This is the identifier of a network cell in the physical layer. This
property is limited to 504 values, and therefore needs to be reused in the
network. If the PCI assignment is poorly planned, the risk for network
conflicts is high.

The ECI is the Extended Cell identification or ECGI (Global).
This number consists of the MCC, MNC, eNodeB and Cell ID.

The CGI is the Cell Global Identification for a Base Transceiver Station in
mobile phone networks. This number is used in the GSM and UMTS networks and
is a combination of the MCC, MNC, LAC and the CI.

The MCC is the Mobile Country Code.
The mobile country code consists of three decimal digits and the mobile
network code consists of two or three decimal digits (for example: MNC of
001 is not the same as MNC of 01). The first digit of the mobile country
code identifies the geographic region as follows (the digits 1 and 8 are
not used):

0: Test networks
2: Europe
3: North America and the Caribbean
4: Asia and the Middle East
5: Australia and Oceania
6: Africa
7: South and Central America
9: Worldwide (Satellite, Air?aboard aircraft, Maritime?aboard ships,
Antarctica)

The MCC is used in combination with an MNC (a combination known as an
"MCC/MNC tuple") to uniquely identify a mobile network operator (carrier)
using the GSM (including GSM-R), UMTS, LTE, and 5G public land mobile
networks. Some but not all CDMA, iDEN, and satellite mobile networks are
identified with an MCC/MNC tuple as well.

The MNC is the Mobile Network Code.
The Mobile Network Code is a unique two- or three-digit number used to
identify a home Public Land Mobile Network (PLMN). MNC is allocated by the
national regulator. A MNC is used in combination with the Mobile country
code to derive the Home Network Identity (HNI).

The LAC is the Location Area Code.
The LAC is the unique number given to each location area within the
network. The served area of a cellular radio access network is usually
divided into location areas, consisting of one or several radio cells.

The eNodeB is the Enhanced NodeB which references a group of antennas on a
cell tower. The eNodeB alone does not identify the sector. To identify the
sector or direction the specific antenna faced, you'll need to refer to the
Cell ID.

The GSM Cell ID is the Cell Identity.
It is a generally unique number used to identify each base transceiver
station (BTS) or sector of a BTS within a location area code (LAC) if not
within a GSM network.

The EARFCN is the E-UTRA Absolute Radio Frequency Channel Number.
In LTE, the carrier frequency in the uplink and downlink is designated by
EARFCN, which ranges between 0-65535. EARFCN uniquely identify the LTE band
and carrier frequency.

From that information which every phone easily reports, I should be able to
deduce the exact sector antenna used by any one connection at any given
time.

Specifically, if I have multiple people at the same place, each of us
should be able to instantly determine which unique sector antenna each of
us is connected to.

On 9/29/2022 10:29 PM, VanguardLH wrote:

<snip>

> Network Cell Info (by M2Catalyst)
> free: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite
> paid: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfo
>
> I have the paid/Pro version, so I cannot say what crippling is present
> in the free version. I used the free version for 2 years, and
> eventually decided to pay ($1.99) for it along with some other freebies
> that I decided to keep after a long trial. They have a features
> comparison table at:
>
> https://www.m2catalyst.com/features
>
> Unless you understand the data presented in the app (I don't know a lot
> of what it shows), it may be hard to figure out which are the
> indentifiers you are looking for. There is so much data presented to
> you that you'll be spending lots of time online to learn lots.
>
> It doesn't use a database for tower lookup. It shows you to which tower
> you are current connected, and even has a map to show you where they are
> besides giving you the GPS coordinates of the tower. GPS is not using
> your smartphone, but part of the signal they send to you; i.e., the
> towers tell you where they are. That's how accurate tracking works in
> Android assuming you don't disable the GPS radio.

Awesome App. Well worth the $1.99 for the paid version.

You're right, it provides a LOT of data, and interpreting it is not a
trivial task.

Really too bad that there's no similar app for the iPhone, but it's not
possible because of limitations and restrictions of iOS. There have been
a few attempts to do apps like this for iOS but the ratings are terrible
because it's just not possible to get the level of information that
Android allows developers to access.

On 9/29/22 10:29 PM, VanguardLH wrote:

> Warning: The app will tend to stay loaded when you close its window for
> the paid versions. That's because the paid versions do measurements in
> the background. When you truly want the app to unload, click the Off
> button (circle with a 12 o'clock tick mark).

Bastards. My Pixel2 battery is already shot (I left it on the charger
overnight for at least a year in order to use the snore-monitor app).

--
Cheers, Bev
"Everything sucks; reverse the wires and everything will blow."
-- Desert Ed

On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 12:19:18 -0700, sms wrote:

> On 9/29/2022 10:29 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Network Cell Info (by M2Catalyst)
>> free: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite
>> paid: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfo
>>
>> I have the paid/Pro version, so I cannot say what crippling is present
>> in the free version. I used the free version for 2 years, and
>> eventually decided to pay ($1.99) for it along with some other freebies
>> that I decided to keep after a long trial. They have a features
>> comparison table at:
>>
>> https://www.m2catalyst.com/features
>>
>> Unless you understand the data presented in the app (I don't know a lot
>> of what it shows), it may be hard to figure out which are the
>> indentifiers you are looking for. There is so much data presented to
>> you that you'll be spending lots of time online to learn lots.
>>
>> It doesn't use a database for tower lookup. It shows you to which tower
>> you are current connected, and even has a map to show you where they are
>> besides giving you the GPS coordinates of the tower. GPS is not using
>> your smartphone, but part of the signal they send to you; i.e., the
>> towers tell you where they are. That's how accurate tracking works in
>> Android assuming you don't disable the GPS radio.
>
> Awesome App. Well worth the $1.99 for the paid version.
>
> You're right, it provides a LOT of data, and interpreting it is not a
> trivial task.
>
> Really too bad that there's no similar app for the iPhone, but it's not
> possible because of limitations and restrictions of iOS. There have been
> a few attempts to do apps like this for iOS but the ratings are terrible
> because it's just not possible to get the level of information that
> Android allows developers to access.

You have to wonder what Apple is so afraid of by not allowing this type of
extremely useful utility app in their Apple iOS app store.

What's the danger to Apple of the iOS user having useful debugging data?

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:29:05 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Network Cell Info (by M2Catalyst)
> free: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite
> paid: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfo

I suspect you wasted your money on that pay ware app copy of open source.
You rewarded a thief.

What does that pay ware do that the free ware open source app does not do?

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9/29/22 10:29 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Warning: The app will tend to stay loaded when you close its window for
>> the paid versions. That's because the paid versions do measurements in
>> the background. When you truly want the app to unload, click the Off
>> button (circle with a 12 o'clock tick mark).
>
> Bastards. My Pixel2 battery is already shot (I left it on the charger
> overnight for at least a year in order to use the snore-monitor app).

It's your choice after loading the app whether to leave it backgrounded
or not. I've never bothered leaving it run backgrounded, but then I
don't use any of its tracking/logging features. Not their fault your
battery is too old, and perhaps even bulging from outgassing. If you
know about Android, exiting a window does NOT unload an app. Android
leaves it in memory, and that includes apps that can continue to drain
your battery. Unlike Windows and Linux where exiting an app mean the
app gets unloaded, Android leave apps loaded when you exit (just the GUI
disappears until you use Recent to bring it back). Some polite apps
give you a real Exit function, like Network Cell Info and Firefox (with
its Quit menu entry). Else, you have to use an app killer to get rid of
backgrounded apps before Android decides to do so to make more space
available for a newly loaded app.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKULr67ZZXw

You don't need their kit, especially if you want to install a factory
branded battery instead of an unknown generic. Spludgers can be bought
for a $1. Depending on how you may or may not collect tools, or stock
your toolkits, you might already have the other tools in the kit. If
not, get the kit.

The problem with disassembling the phone is all the glued-down
components won't stick as well when reassembled. The glue is not
designed to be reusable. Some screws have blue (temporary) threadlock,
but I've yet to see a video showing reapplying new threadlock. Most
users gob on way too much threadlock. Even if you have a shop do the
battery replacement, they go through the same procedure which means
water resistance get compromized since breaking the seal means the seal
remains broken thereafter.

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> Network Cell Info (by M2Catalyst)
>> free: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite
>> paid: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfo
>
> I suspect you wasted your money on that pay ware app copy of open source.
> You rewarded a thief.
>
> What does that pay ware do that the free ware open source app does not do?

Rather than have me waste time comparing one payware app against every
candidate freeware app, give an example of a freeware app that does
everything the payware one does. You'll need to build a table showing
this app compared against a freeware one with all the features of each
to know which is missing what.

On 10/2/22 5:00 AM, VanguardLH wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/29/22 10:29 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
>>
>>> Warning: The app will tend to stay loaded when you close its window for
>>> the paid versions. That's because the paid versions do measurements in
>>> the background. When you truly want the app to unload, click the Off
>>> button (circle with a 12 o'clock tick mark).
>>
>> Bastards. My Pixel2 battery is already shot (I left it on the charger
>> overnight for at least a year in order to use the snore-monitor app).
>
> It's your choice after loading the app whether to leave it backgrounded
> or not. I've never bothered leaving it run backgrounded, but then I
> don't use any of its tracking/logging features. Not their fault your
> battery is too old, and perhaps even bulging from outgassing. If you
> know about Android, exiting a window does NOT unload an app. Android
> leaves it in memory, and that includes apps that can continue to drain
> your battery.

I've installed a couple of 'cleanup' apps that claim to actually shut
down all the unnecessary apps. They themselves use significant battery
power and a lot of apps restart all by themselves. Or the cleaner lies
through its teeth...

> Unlike Windows and Linux where exiting an app mean the
> app gets unloaded, Android leave apps loaded when you exit (just the GUI
> disappears until you use Recent to bring it back). Some polite apps
> give you a real Exit function, like Network Cell Info and Firefox (with
> its Quit menu entry). Else, you have to use an app killer to get rid of
> backgrounded apps before Android decides to do so to make more space
> available for a newly loaded app.

Do you know of one that actually works?

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKULr67ZZXw
>
> You don't need their kit, especially if you want to install a factory
> branded battery instead of an unknown generic. Spludgers can be bought
> for a $1. Depending on how you may or may not collect tools, or stock
> your toolkits, you might already have the other tools in the kit. If
> not, get the kit.

The batteries are under $20 and many of them seem to come with the
essential tools. I love the word "sp[l]udger". One came with the set of
torx drivers along with some tiny +/- screwdrivers and nifty tweezers.
I love tools. It makes me sad that we just don't want to use them any
more. How many people do yo know with 6 crowfoot wrenches?

> The problem with disassembling the phone is all the glued-down
> components won't stick as well when reassembled. The glue is not
> designed to be reusable. Some screws have blue (temporary) threadlock,
> but I've yet to see a video showing reapplying new threadlock.

I'm trying to remember the actual name of that stuff. We never used
that, but we did use 'yellow stuff' to keep the nuts and bolts on the
old Japanese motorcycles from falling out. I never actually believed
that they were made of pot metal, but I certainly couldn't prove that
they weren't.

> Most
> users gob on way too much threadlock. Even if you have a shop do the
> battery replacement, they go through the same procedure which means
> water resistance get compromized since breaking the seal means the seal
> remains broken thereafter.

There are people who are just GOOD at this sort of thing. I watched an
old guy with Parkinson's rebuild our monsterhome's automatic
transmission by hand and from memory. Not a single tremor and he moved
like one of those robots that puts cars together. A memorable sight.

The phone claimed to be 'refurbished', which would seem to imply that it
had been taken apart. It looked entirely virgin, though. I have yet to
drop a phone on a hard surface and the wettest they ever get is from the
sweat inside my bra -- that's where I tuck it when I'm skiing. I figure
the fat will sort of cushion it if I fall on it, which has never
happened. The only problem I've ever had was when I was holding my
camera in my hand skiing faster than I should have been -- the tumble
and the OH SHIT! are recorded for posterity and it tweaked the lens
cover of the little Canon camera so it won't close all the way.

--
Cheers, Bev
"...and then I'll become a veterinarian because I love children."
-- Julie Brown

On Sun, 2 Oct 2022 07:01:48 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

>> What does that pay ware do that the free ware open source app does not do?
>
> Rather than have me waste time comparing one payware app against every
> candidate freeware app, give an example of a freeware app that does
> everything the payware one does. You'll need to build a table showing
> this app compared against a freeware one with all the features of each
> to know which is missing what.

Common pay ware thievery of open source apps is common on Google Play.

Rather than reward a thief, why not reward the original developer?
https://github.com/hzx0910/cellular-z

Rather than have me list everything each app does, you'll need to tell me
what your pay ware app copy does that the free ware original doesn't do.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=make.more.r2d2.cellular_z&gl=DE

Rather than each of us work alone, why not each of us work together.

You tell me what you need most from the thief's app. Five or ten things.
I tell you whether the original app does what its thieved copy does.

It will.

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've installed a couple of 'cleanup' apps that claim to actually shut
> down all the unnecessary apps. They themselves use significant battery
> power and a lot of apps restart all by themselves. Or the cleaner lies
> through its teeth...

Some killer/cleanup apps are ineffective. As I recall, I used to use
Droid Optimizer. However, it's screen gadget stopped working (which
tells you how much memory space is left).

Also, many apps can be designated as a service or "sticky". With either
attribute, it is the responsibility of the OS to reload them if the OS
finds they are missing. You can kill them all day long, but the OS will
reload them. I also found that sometimes I was killing the wrong app.
For example, Hangouts Dialer has its app (ancilliary to Hangouts app to
add a phone dialer to add calling to Hangouts instead of just having
Hangouts a chat app), but the app to kill was for a differently named
process. As I recall, and after trying unsuccessfully to unload
Hangouts and Hangouts Dialer, I displayed all apps, including system
apps, and that's how I found the correct one to kill. I did NOT leave
Droid Optimizer (DO) configured to periodically kill idle apps, because
I might try to use it just before DO decided to kill it. I'd use the
screen gadget instead (which didn't display correct info anymore, but
did activate DO to do the idle app cleanup). It also has a whitelist to
prevent those apps from getting targeted for kills, and the whitelist is
already pre-populated not to kill DO. Some apps you really do want
running in the background all the time, like phone dialer, e-mail,
calendar, messaging, car park tracking, Fitbit, home security
monitoring, OneDrive/Dropbox/Google Drive, OneNote or Evernote, etc).

If an app is a service or has the sticky attribute (to get reloaded by
the OS if found missing), you have to dig into the app to see if there
is a setting or option to immediately and fully unload the app when its
window closes, complain to the app author about the greedy behavior, or
find another equivalent app that has a real exit option. Or, you let
Android decide when to unload the backgrounded app to make room for a
newly loaded app.

> The batteries are under $20 and many of them seem to come with the
> essential tools. I love the word "sp[l]udger". One came with the set of
> torx drivers along with some tiny +/- screwdrivers and nifty tweezers.
> I love tools. It makes me sad that we just don't want to use them any
> more. How many people do yo know with 6 crowfoot wrenches?

I have a set: SAE and metric. Almost mandatory when working in tight
spaces, like car engines where the body has shrunk to make the engine
compartment overly cramped. However, those require a bit more width to
use, because an extension bar that goes from the socket wrench to the
crowfoot box socket. Sometimes it's easier to use a ratcheting box-end
wrench. The only leeway you need then is the thickness of the wrench to
get on and off a nut. My father was a contractor (building, HVAC,
electrical, plumbing), so I inherited tons of tools from him. Farm
sales are good places to find tools, especially old specialty ones that
aren't in the hardware stores, as long as they aren't too rusted. Got a
belt punch that wasn't too rusty, and cleaned and lubed it. Hook-style
spanner wrenches, too. And a variety of hammer styles for which I still
don't know what some were designed for. Fact is, I'll have a shopping
list when I go to the hardware store, but I always come out with more
than was on the list. Can't get out of the toy shop without more toys.

>> The problem with disassembling the phone is all the glued-down
>> components won't stick as well when reassembled. The glue is not
>> designed to be reusable. Some screws have blue (temporary) threadlock,
>> but I've yet to see a video showing reapplying new threadlock.
>
> I'm trying to remember the actual name of that stuff.

Used to be butyl tape, same stuff you use around newly installed windows
as waterproof flashing, but now it might be a type of vinyl inside the
phones. I liked butyl tape for wrapping electrical connections than the
rubber splicing tape now available. The butyl formed better and stuck
together, but you need to add a wire tie around the rubber (and vinyl)
splicing tape to keep it from unwrapping (don't rely on the glue to keep
the tape from unraveling, because it won't over time). I keep looking
for a roll of silicone repair tape as it is advertized as self-sealing
aka self-bonding, but it's always out of stock at the stores. Might
have to order it online.

Or were you asking about the threadlock? What I dislike is blue was
temporary, green was light-duty and a penetrating grade, orange is
removable but 3X strength of blue, and red was high-temperature
permanent (requiring 500F heating to remove). Nowadays blue comes in
red-colored squeeze tubes. The tube color can no longer be relied to
tell you which color threadlock is inside.

> We never used
> that, but we did use 'yellow stuff' to keep the nuts and bolts on the
> old Japanese motorcycles from falling out. I never actually believed
> that they were made of pot metal, but I certainly couldn't prove that
> they weren't.

Hmm, don't remember "yellow stuff" threadlocker, but there are lots of
formulae that I haven't use. Permatex has lots to offer. Didn't see
"yellow" threadlocker at permatex.com. 3M makes lots of products, too.
but didn't see yellow there, either. Maybe the yellow stuff was
actually a low-strength epoxy. I know if you use JB Weld
steel-reinforced epoxy, you will NEVER get the parts undone. I even
used it to repair a hole in a car's drain pan: drained the oil, ground
around the hole to expose bare metal, applied the JB Weld, and it
hardened to close to the strength of steel (couldn't scratch or dent
it).

Ah, found yellow threadlock at Loctite: medium strength, for coarse
threads, anaerobic (absense of air). See it advertized at the online
retailers (Amazon, eBay), like:

https://www.ellsworth.com/products/by-manufacturer/henkel-loctite/adhesives/anaerobic/henkel-loctite-577-medium-strength-threadlocker-yellow-50-ml-bottle/

Not a high-temperature formula (up to 212F, boiling water), so hopefully
you didn't use it on engine or exhaust. I'd use red (high-temp), and
know that I'd need my heat gun to undo the connection. Loctite 577 is
better suited for coarse threads (to bridge the larger gap between
mating surfaces). Loctite 567 & 577 are considered pipe sealants: they
don't shrink, crack, creep, or shred, are more pliable (resist vibration
and shock), and seal to the bursting strength of most piping systems.

https://www.loctiteproducts.com/en/know-how/fix-stuff/use-pipe-sealant-to-put-an-end-to-leaks.html

I don't deal with high-pressure plumbing setups, just what you find in
residential construction, so I just get the yellow pipe dope/goop you
get at the hardware store for cast iron pipes. Copper is soldered, and
plastic uses a solvent to seal, and SharkBite fittings just need cleaned
ends to clamp onto (only have found them at sharkbite.com, Home Depot,
and Ace Hardware).

> The phone claimed to be 'refurbished', which would seem to imply that
> it had been taken apart.

Not usually. It just means someone returned an item they didn't want,
it wasn't what they expected, or it was from one of those trade-in
programs (bring in your phone, you'll get a newer one). Tis also
possible it came out of stock, but was discontinued by the manufacturer
or past warranty, so the seller or storehouse dumped it. Also,
refurbish meant the product went through some testing to ensure it still
works. Nowadays all it means is a clean wipe was used, maybe some
scratch filler, and the product is resold with almost no inspection or
functional testing. I consider refurbished the same as as-is regarding
quality and usability.

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>>> What does that pay ware do that the free ware open source app does not do?
>>
>> Rather than have me waste time comparing one payware app against every
>> candidate freeware app, give an example of a freeware app that does
>> everything the payware one does. You'll need to build a table showing
>> this app compared against a freeware one with all the features of each
>> to know which is missing what.
>
> Common pay ware thievery of open source apps is common on Google Play.
>
> Rather than reward a thief, why not reward the original developer?
> https://github.com/hzx0910/cellular-z
>
> Rather than have me list everything each app does, you'll need to tell me
> what your pay ware app copy does that the free ware original doesn't do.
> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=make.more.r2d2.cellular_z&gl=DE
>
> Rather than each of us work alone, why not each of us work together.
>
> You tell me what you need most from the thief's app. Five or ten things.
> I tell you whether the original app does what its thieved copy does.
>
> It will.

Rather than look at an app hosted at Github, or other code repository,
I'd start with the Google Play Store since that is from where I install
Android apps. No, Google doesn't immediately catch every app with
untoward behavior, but they strive to do so, may retroactively remove
"bad" apps, and do more than nothing at the repositories. The app is in
the store at:

https://play.google.com/store/search?q=cellular-z

The app's author is Zhengzhou CengSan Information Technology Co., LTD.
Distressing the readme.cmd file at their Github project site doesn't
list anything about their product other than hyperlinks to the Github
pages; i.e., no info about their product. I don't read Chinese, so
their Cellular-Z.pdf file is useless to me, and I'm not wasting time
trying to feed it through Google Translate. I did run about a page of
the PDF through Google Translate to see that is where you get info on
how to use the app. Learn Chinese, the app author's native language, or
use Google Translate and end up trying to comprehend Engrish. The
instruction.html file is also in Chinese.

I didn't bother delving into the app's code to see which libraries or
services were borrowed by this app. I also don't use a vast majority of
the functions in the Network Celluar Info app, and likely the same for
the CZ app.

Some differences I see (not an in-depth review):

- Cellular-Z (CZ) has a panel for Wi-Fi stats. Not there for me in
Network Cellular Info (NCI). Not sure why CZ bothers with wi-fi stats
since that has nothing to do with cellular stats. You might be using
a VOIP app to make calls, but that's with a wi-fi hotspot, not with a
cell tower.
- CZ shows a GPS map of satellites relative to my current location. NCI
shows a Google map for the cellular tower to which I'm current
connected. If I needed to know which GPS satellites were used for my
location (not of the tower's which provides that data in its signal),
I use the GPS Status app. However, that's all about GPS location and
the satellites used for YOUR position, and nothing to do with cellular
communication itself. NCI tells you the GPS data for the tower that
the tower is reporting to the phone. I don't need to know which GPS
satellites the tower uses probably because it's position is fixed and
doesn't need to connect to GPS satellites. It's not like the tower is
drifting at sea. I don't need GPS satellite info on myself when I'm
getting positioning of the *tower*. I can enter GPS coordinates into
Google Maps to find out where is the tower geographically, or just use
the Map panel in NCI.
There is a Map panel in CZ, but it's in Chinese in the screenshot, so
I can't tell what it's showing me. Presumably the app should be using
the regional settings in Android to determine which language
(character set) to use for text. NCI shows it is using Google Maps.
CZ doesn't identify its map data source. Maybe it's OsmAnd which is a
front-end for OpenStreets which is community-driven reporting (aka
contributors) for updates, and uses city plats for base data (and
plats are often out-of-date or show future streets that don't yet
exist). If an area has few or no contributors, mapping accuracy is
poor, if even present. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/about. NCI
uses Google's Map API. I've before used the OpenStreetsMap and OsmAnd
apps. No thanks. Google is more complete and more accurate, and
updates are more often. Google generates $4.3bn/year with their
mapping services. They can afford to be running their mapping trucks
around, and accessing other commercial map data sources. OpenStreets
resources are pitiful by comparison. OpenStreets desparately needs
more contributors.
- CZ's tower map is, according the app's screenshots at the Play Store,
maybe a Google map or might use OsmAnd (which is a community driven
database), under the Slot 1 and Slot 2 tab panels, but presents what
looks like a walking map to the tower (I don't read Chinese, so I
can't tell what is presented in the map).
- CZ present other wi-fi data, like device names, IP address, dBm, DNS
server, etc, but again what has that to do with *cellular*
communication? That's just feature bloat.
- I don't see CZ offers a signal tracking feature to report in which
areas coverage is low or zero, like OpenSignal's signal tracking
feature. For both NCI and OpenSignal, you need to leave the apps
running in the background, so they can record signal strength and
upload the data to their servers to have them track actual coverage
rather than what the carriers claim. What carriers claim is false in
many areas, like them showing superb coverage in my area, but that's a
lie because I'm in a valley near a river - the towers on my side don't
point down (which would obviously point at obstructions, like
buildings and trees, and the towers on the other side of the river
atop a cliff also don't point down to me). You can get network
coverage via community-driven recordings, or rely on the overly coarse
granularity of the maps from the carriers. No, I'm not a volunteer by
leaving those apps running in the background.
My smartphone has a bad battery design (drains way too fast) which
is known ever since released (I didn't research enough when I bought
it 3 years after its release). I've put in new non-counterfeit
batteries, and they still don't provide more than 10 hours of
up-time, or down to 6 hours under heavy use. Else, with a phone and
battery that stay up for days, yeah, I'd consider participating in
the coverage reporting. I don't relish when I get around to
replacing the phone with a new one since the new ones don't have
user-servicable batteries (you have to break into the case instead
of having a convenient back panel to replace the battery).

There are so many differences between the libs and services used by CZ
and NCI that your claim that NCI stole CZ's code is not only unfounded,
but a deliberate lie. Even if some online services overlap, one doesn't
have to steal the code from another to use those services. Those
services provide public APIs to access the services. That they overlap
on some functionality also does not mandate code stealing. M2Catalyst
is a commercial corporation at 120 Vantis Dr Ste 310 Aliso Viejo, CA,
92656-2677 United States; see:

https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company-profiles.m2catalyst_llc.454c0eaf64c57f5074ed3c84c0aedf76.html

Who is Zhengzhou CengSan Information Technology Co., LTD? I let you to
find them, their postal address, a phone number, and sales information

Also remember that I said I had used NCI for a couple years before
deciding to pay for it. Like with shareware, if I've kept it and used
enough to know I want to keep it further, I pay for it. Sure, they get
rewarded, because they offer more of on-topic content (cellular, not
wifi and your-GPS fluff to bloat the product away from its primary use
of getting cellular information). If $2 if so extreme a cost to you,
keep using the freeware stuff. Sorry, I don't see that I rewarded the
wrong app author. You seem to confuse 2 apps that overlap in some
functionality as one just must be stealing from the other.

https://github.com/hzx0910/cellular-z/graphs/contributors
Just 1 contributor: the app author.

https://github.com/hzx0910/cellular-z/graphs/code-frequency
A big effort 3-1/2 years ago. Little since then.

M2Catalyst was formed in 2012. M2Catalyst acquired the Network Cellular
Info app from Wilysis in July 2019 (https://www.m2catalyst.com/faq)
which is why Wilysis is sometimes mentioned for this app. I found an
online manual for Wilysis' Network Cell Info app at:

On Sun, 2 Oct 2022 21:36:42 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> https://play.google.com/store/search?q=cellular-z
>
> The app's author is Zhengzhou CengSan Information Technology Co., LTD.
> Distressing the readme.cmd file at their Github project site doesn't
> list anything about their product other than hyperlinks to the Github
> pages; i.e., no info about their product.

If you want to pay money for open source apps, then that's up to you.
If you want to reward thievery of open source code, then that's up to you.
Rather than each of us work alone, why not each of us work together.

You refuse to work together so that we can compare the two apps.
All you had to do was describe what you paid for that you needed.

To do that, all you had to do was install both apps which is what I did.
Unfortunately, your copycat app crashed on my Pixel.

So I can only tell you what the more robust Github app does that I like.
There are screenshots for all of these features on the Google Play Store.

In addition to the screenshots (which are in my system language so it's
your problem if you can't find them in English) for the open source app,
there are speed tests, auto save, map & track, nr-arcfn queries, earfcn
queries, arfcn queries, and even indoor coverage tests based on a floorplan
map which you can input into the open source app.

> - Cellular-Z (CZ) has a panel for Wi-Fi stats. Not there for me in
> Network Cellular Info (NCI).

The open source app has both Wifi and Cellular debugging information.
Based on what you said, the NCI app does not have both.

> - CZ shows a GPS map of satellites relative to my current location. NCI
> shows a Google map for the cellular tower to which I'm current
> connected.

We can work together to double check but I think the open source app shows
what it thinks is the location based on signal strength. I know this
because the open source app doesn't use the Internet (for privacy reasons).

I think the NCI app might be using an Internet lookup.
Internet cellular tower lookups are well known to be always wrong.
There are reasons for that we can go into but everyone already knows this.

Since the NCI app crashed on my Pixel, you'll have to work with me to say
how the NCI app mapped the tower location. Did it use an Ineternet lookup?

If so, that's a strike against it.

> If I needed to know which GPS satellites were used for my
> location (not of the tower's which provides that data in its signal),
> I use the GPS Status app. However, that's all about GPS location and
> the satellites used for YOUR position, and nothing to do with cellular
> communication itself.

The open source app tells you the satellite information in real time.
Based on what you're saying, I'm assuming the NCI app does not.

> NCI tells you the GPS data for the tower that
> the tower is reporting to the phone.

This is actually impossible.
So it's not doing what you think it's doing.
You were led astray.

It's well known that no GPS lookup for cell towers exists in the USA that
is available to the public.

Anything you think is a lookup is based on an amalgamation of user data.
Which means your app is using the Internet.
That's a strike against it.

> I don't need to know which GPS
> satellites the tower uses probably because it's position is fixed and
> doesn't need to connect to GPS satellites. It's not like the tower is
> drifting at sea. I don't need GPS satellite info on myself when I'm
> getting positioning of the *tower*. I can enter GPS coordinates into
> Google Maps to find out where is the tower geographically, or just use
> the Map panel in NCI.

You think you have the GPS coordinates of the tower you're connected to.
As I've already explained, that's impossible.
You're being fooled.

> There is a Map panel in CZ, but it's in Chinese in the screenshot, so
> I can't tell what it's showing me. Presumably the app should be using
> the regional settings in Android to determine which language
> (character set) to use for text.

You did install the app, didn't you?
Mine is in the Android system language.

When you installed the free app, why would you have a system language set
up in Chinese? Please don't blame the tool for your own mistakes.

> NCI shows it is using Google Maps.
> CZ doesn't identify its map data source.

The open source app map display can show the decibels for each historical
connection and it can save the tower locations to a csv file or a jpeg.

I don't use the map feature as I don't need to know where my phone thinks
the tower is since all those net lookups are well known to be inaccurate.

Mine doesn't show any map anyway.
But the many screenshots on Google Play show what may be an OSM map.

Anyway, the best way to find a tower is to call the carrier 611 and ask
them what you're currently connected to or at least what towers are nearby.

> - CZ's tower map is, according the app's screenshots at the Play Store,
> maybe a Google map or might use OsmAnd (which is a community driven
> database), under the Slot 1 and Slot 2 tab panels, but presents what
> looks like a walking map to the tower (I don't read Chinese, so I
> can't tell what is presented in the map).

I don't know why your display is not in your system language.
Don't blame the tool for your mistakes though.
My Google Play Store screenshots for Cellular-Z are in the system language.

> - CZ present other wi-fi data, like device names, IP address, dBm, DNS
> server, etc, but again what has that to do with *cellular*
> communication? That's just feature bloat.

You paid for less features and then you complain about getting many more
features for free? That is not a sensible position for you to be taking.

> - I don't see CZ offers a signal tracking feature to report in which
> areas coverage is low or zero, like OpenSignal's signal tracking
> feature. For both NCI and OpenSignal, you need to leave the apps
> running in the background, so they can record signal strength and
> upload the data to their servers to have them track actual coverage
> rather than what the carriers claim.

The open source app has an "auto save" feature which can save in json or
csv at user settable time intervals of 1 minute, 2 minutes, and 5 minutes.

> What carriers claim is false in
> many areas, like them showing superb coverage in my area, but that's a
> lie because I'm in a valley near a river - the towers on my side don't
> point down (which would obviously point at obstructions, like
> buildings and trees, and the towers on the other side of the river
> atop a cliff also don't point down to me).

You don't have to explain the obvious to me. I know.

> Also remember that I said I had used NCI for a couple years before
> deciding to pay for it.

You wasted your money.
You paid for less when you could have obtained more for free.
It's your money.

Just don't try to justify paying for less as being a logical decision.
It's a dumb decision if you ask me.

> If $2 if so extreme a cost to you,
> keep using the freeware stuff.

Every time some asshole like you seem to be justifies their dumb decisions
by claiming everyone else is too cheap to waste their money on garbage,
they use that stupid argument you just made.

You made a stupid decision.
And that's OK.

Live with it.
Don't call me cheap because I don't make stupid decisions like you do.

Own your own stupidity and misplaced hubris.
Apologize or this conversation is over.

On 10/2/22 4:49 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've installed a couple of 'cleanup' apps that claim to actually shut
>> down all the unnecessary apps. They themselves use significant battery
>> power and a lot of apps restart all by themselves. Or the cleaner lies
>> through its teeth...
>
> Some killer/cleanup apps are ineffective. As I recall, I used to use
> Droid Optimizer. However, it's screen gadget stopped working (which
> tells you how much memory space is left).

I've got that. "1-touch" kills 6 apps. I do it again and it kills 12
apps. WTF? It didn't seem to make any difference. I can pretty much
WATCH the battery discharging :-(

> Also, many apps can be designated as a service or "sticky".

That's pure evil.

> Or, you let
> Android decide when to unload the backgrounded app to make room for a
> newly loaded app.

I don't care if it just sits there in memory, I only worry if it's
actually doing something that eats battery.
>
>> The batteries are under $20 and many of them seem to come with the
>> essential tools. I love the word "sp[l]udger". One came with the set of
>> torx drivers along with some tiny +/- screwdrivers and nifty tweezers.
>> I love tools. It makes me sad that we just don't want to use them any
>> more. How many people do yo know with 6 crowfoot wrenches?
>
> I have a set: SAE and metric. Almost mandatory when working in tight
> spaces, like car engines where the body has shrunk to make the engine
> compartment overly cramped.

Excellent! We've never had a use for ours. We acquired most of ours at
yard sales. For a quarter you can't turn down a nice Proto wrench.
Best is when the ex-wife is selling off hubby's stuff! We never got
around to using the case of Mobile 1 that we bought for $5. Even so, I
eventually had to buy a Craftsman 10mm socket, which was a
disappointment -- I could peel the chrome off with my thumbnail.
However, a number of decades later I found a couple of 10mms (one a deep
6-point) in the gutter so I guess it all evens out..

> My father was a contractor (building, HVAC,
> electrical, plumbing), so I inherited tons of tools from him.

A friend's dad repaired the big earthmoving equipment used to build the
western interstates. He'll never use the tools. He'll never use the
yard sale tools he accumulated when we were all going to yard sales.
His kids don't want them. Maybe NOBODY wants them. Really sad. My son
fixes stuff, but cars just don't need a lot of fixing any more and he
has his own tools. Do they even teach this stuff in school any more?

> Farm
> sales are good places to find tools, especially old specialty ones that
> aren't in the hardware stores, as long as they aren't too rusted.

Before The Plague there used to be a bimonthly antique-tool sale behind
one of the hardware stores. It was fun to go and try to guess the
purpose of the weird ones. Once you know its name, a spokeshave is obvious!

> Got a
> belt punch that wasn't too rusty, and cleaned and lubed it. Hook-style
> spanner wrenches, too. And a variety of hammer styles for which I still
> don't know what some were designed for. Fact is, I'll have a shopping
> list when I go to the hardware store, but I always come out with more
> than was on the list. Can't get out of the toy shop without more toys.

There used to be a real hardware store here. When we were building
electronic stuff I bought a lot of weird hardware there. The owner
offered me a job as a salesperson once, a fact of which I am
inordinately proud. I had toddlers and couldn't take it, but I would
have liked to.

>>> The problem with disassembling the phone is all the glued-down
>>> components won't stick as well when reassembled. The glue is not
>>> designed to be reusable. Some screws have blue (temporary) threadlock,
>>> but I've yet to see a video showing reapplying new threadlock.
>>
>> I'm trying to remember the actual name of that stuff.

LOCTITE!

> I keep looking
> for a roll of silicone repair tape as it is advertized as self-sealing
> aka self-bonding, but it's always out of stock at the stores. Might
> have to order it online.

I bought some at Walmart to wrap around a good hose with a leak. I
suspect that the hose (heavy black unshiny rubber) couldn't be cleaned
well enough to make it stick. I used half the roll, but it still
leaked. I returned it. Hubby insisted we buy some Alien Tape, though,
and that's pretty cool stuff. We'll probably be buried with it.

> Or were you asking about the threadlock? What I dislike is blue was
> temporary, green was light-duty and a penetrating grade, orange is
> removable but 3X strength of blue, and red was high-temperature
> permanent (requiring 500F heating to remove). Nowadays blue comes in
> red-colored squeeze tubes. The tube color can no longer be relied to
> tell you which color threadlock is inside.

After my time.

>> We never used
>> that, but we did use 'yellow stuff' to keep the nuts and bolts on the
>> old Japanese motorcycles from falling out. I never actually believed
>> that they were made of pot metal, but I certainly couldn't prove that
>> they weren't.
>
> Hmm, don't remember "yellow stuff" threadlocker,

This was some sort of special-purpose cement/gasket stuff that came in
toothpaste-size tubes. You put a fingernail-size blob of it on the
nut-bolt join. Once it hardened you could see wrinkles if the nut
started to loosen, which hardly ever happened. ALL dirtriders used
'yellow stuff'. After a while the Japanese learned to make good
fasteners, but not in the early 60s. You got into the habit of going
over your bike with a wrench before each ride to make sure nothing came
apart. If the yellow stuff looked iffy you peeled it off, tightened the
bolt and gave it a new blob.

Kawasaki and Suzuki used welded-on nuts for some things and aircraft
nuts for others. Honda and Yamaha didn't. I figured that that meant
that H and Y cheaped out in other ways too.

> I even
> used it to repair a hole in a car's drain pan: drained the oil, ground
> around the hole to expose bare metal, applied the JB Weld, and it
> hardened to close to the strength of steel (couldn't scratch or dent
> it).

I fixed a crack in my Kawasaki F7 carb with that 2-part epoxy gas tank
repair material that you knead together. Wonderful stuff.

> Ah, found yellow threadlock at Loctite: medium strength, for coarse
> threads, anaerobic (absense of air). See it advertized at the online
> retailers (Amazon, eBay), like:

That's not it, but I swear I remembered 'Loctite' before I saw it here.

>> The phone claimed to be 'refurbished', which would seem to imply that
>> it had been taken apart.
>
> Not usually. It just means someone returned an item they didn't want,
> it wasn't what they expected, or it was from one of those trade-in
> programs (bring in your phone, you'll get a newer one). Tis also
> possible it came out of stock, but was discontinued by the manufacturer
> or past warranty, so the seller or storehouse dumped it. Also,
> refurbish meant the product went through some testing to ensure it still
> works. Nowadays all it means is a clean wipe was used, maybe some
> scratch filler, and the product is resold with almost no inspection or
> functional testing. I consider refurbished the same as as-is regarding
> quality and usability.

That's a shame. Son and hubby bought the 64GB version (ebay, refurb,
$80 as I recall) before I did and I liked the camera so much I bought
the 128GB version for myself. All three looked totally virgin, so
perhaps they were just overstock. Generic charge cables and box, so
probably not from the factory. I've used only half of the memory, so I
KNOW I did the right thing.

--
Cheers, Bev
I'm not saying we should kill all the stupid people, I'm just
saying let's remove all the warning labels and let the problem
sort itself out.

On 10/2/22 10:00 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

>>> We never used
>>> that, but we did use 'yellow stuff' to keep the nuts and bolts on the
>>> old Japanese motorcycles from falling out. I never actually believed
>>> that they were made of pot metal, but I certainly couldn't prove that
>>> they weren't.
>
> This was some sort of special-purpose cement/gasket stuff that came in
> toothpaste-size tubes. You put a fingernail-size blob of it on the
> nut-bolt join. Once it hardened you could see wrinkles if the nut
> started to loosen, which hardly ever happened. ALL dirtriders used
> 'yellow stuff'. After a while the Japanese learned to make good
> fasteners, but not in the early 60s. You got into the habit of going
> over your bike with a wrench before each ride to make sure nothing came
> apart. If the yellow stuff looked iffy you peeled it off, tightened the
> bolt and gave it a new blob.

This may be it, but it came in a yellow tube -- much easier to find!
Perhaps that's why they changed the tube color to black.

https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/p/d/b40069421/

--
Cheers, Bev
"I just realized how bad the economy really is. I recently
bought a new toaster oven and as a complimentary gift,
I was given a bank." -- L. Legro

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Oct 2022 21:36:42 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>
>> https://play.google.com/store/search?q=cellular-z
>>
>> The app's author is Zhengzhou CengSan Information Technology Co., LTD.
>> Distressing the readme.cmd file at their Github project site doesn't
>> list anything about their product other than hyperlinks to the Github
>> pages; i.e., no info about their product.
>
> If you want to pay money for open source apps, then that's up to you.
> If you want to reward thievery of open source code, then that's up to you.
> Rather than each of us work alone, why not each of us work together.

Well, you're back to your lie refusing to acknowlege that CZ didn't even
exist when NCI came out. You want to push your agenda regarding
reputation, and I'm not going to participate anymore. Perhaps you
spewed your insult before getting down to where I mention the history of
both app authors, and didn't bother to edit this out before submit.

> You refuse to work together so that we can compare the two apps.
> All you had to do was describe what you paid for that you needed.

I already provided the web page with the feature comparison between the
free and paid versions.

As for why I purchased, that was over 2 years ago, so I don't remember.
Could've been I had been using other apps in their freeware versions,
decided to pay similar to how I use shareware enough to know if I'm
keeping it, and went through the apps list to see what others I want to
buy. If you think $1.99 is costly, you should look at the ParKing
(https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=il.talent.parking.premium)
that costs $6.99, and I paid for it after a year or two of use. As I
recall, I paid to get support for more than 1 car, and perhaps automatic
parking recording using a Bluetooth disconnect from my car (so I didn't
have to manually add a new way point for parking). Yep, I tried some
other parking recorders, but in trialing them found they sucked. Free
doesn't always mean better. Is LibreOffice better than MS 365. No
fucking way, but it's free, and I use it, but periodically run into
limitations, especially in Calc (MS Excel equivalent), that makes be
consider going back to Excel, like the stupidity in LO's workaround for
dynamically sized tables linked to charts that is easy with a drag
handle in Excel. I tried other office suites, but found them lacking.
LO was lacking, but not enough to yet prod me to dole out for MS 365.

By the way, you can still get Windows 10 for free. Just don't register
it, and ignore the watermarking on the desktop (there are workarounds).
The trial of Windows 10 never expires. Did I do that? Nope. My new
build cost around $2600, so the OS cost was trivial. Can I get clothes
for super cheap at Goodwill? Sure, and I did back when I was destitute,
but not now when I can afford the retail stores. Do I like deals? Sure
I do, but not if I'm going to waste more of time in research and
trialing than the cost to buy. Amazing how so many users consider their
time as valueless.

> To do that, all you had to do was install both apps which is what I
> did. Unfortunately, your copycat app crashed on my Pixel.

Oh, here we go again with the deliberately bogus reputation berating.
If anyone copied another, it had to be CZ which wasn't around when NCI
came out. Duh!

I have no interest in the CZ app. NCI does what I need, and a hell of
lot more that I don't yet understand. I'm not writing a review to post
at Youtube, or some other site for the socially needy (Facebook,
Twitter, etc). Unlike you, my time has worth. I don't consider my time
as valueless, especially when I'm not interested in an app that relies
on OpenStreets for its map data source.

>> - Cellular-Z (CZ) has a panel for Wi-Fi stats. Not there for me in
>> Network Cellular Info (NCI).
>
> The open source app has both Wifi and Cellular debugging information.
> Based on what you said, the NCI app does not have both.

Actually I just found wifi data in the NCI app. I find it worthless, so
I accuse NCI of also having feature bloat, just not as much as CZ. An
app to provide information on cellular communications that wastes code
and screen space on wifi connectivity, uh huh. For wifi info, I'd
rather use an app that is specifically designed for that connection
method, like WiFi Analyzer from VREM (open source, free) although I'd
have to research to check if it was best of breed, but I'd only spend
time on research if I actually had a need for that info instead of just
idle curiousity to waste my time. However, if I had wifi problems that
required digging into the technology, I might was a wifi surveying app,
like NetSpot from Etwok.

>> - CZ shows a GPS map of satellites relative to my current location. NCI
>> shows a Google map for the cellular tower to which I'm current
>> connected.
>
> We can work together to double check but I think the open source app
> shows what it thinks is the location based on signal strength.

That would be of dubious value. Signal strength is affected by more
than straight-line unobstructed distance. Just walking down to my
basement is going to raise attenuation of the cell signal. I could see
it showing, and perhaps even recording (as in a log), how signal
strength varies as you move around. The NCI app does that.

> I know this because the open source app doesn't use the Internet (for
> privacy reasons).

From where does it get its map data?

Cellular-Z PRIVACY POLICY
https://hzx0910.github.io/cellular-z/

How do they get that info without an Internet connection? Could be a
problem with Engrisch. "We need" could mean they collect that data, or
perhaps they meant "Our app needs".

> I think the NCI app might be using an Internet lookup.

Not for the GPS data in the signal from the tower, or data obtained from
the phone, like signal strength. Yes, for the Google Maps API they use
to show maps. NCI doesn't use a cell tower database lookup where it has
to download the database from somewhere. You get the GPS coordinates
from the tower, and the coordinates are used in Google Maps. This is
all dynamic, not from stagnant database downloads.

Oh, and the NCI app, if you choose, can monitor signal strength as you
move around for whatever tower it is currently connected. This is
provide a more accurate coverage map than you'll find from any of the
cell carriers. OpenSignal has the same community-driven data update
feature. The logs get uploaded to them, so they can analyze and report
to other users.

Obviously the speed test in both apps require an Internet connection to
use servers for the testing.

> Internet cellular tower lookups are well known to be always wrong.

With NCI, the Google Maps API is used when it draws a map for where is
the tower. I think CZ uses OsmAnd aka OpenStreets. Do they have a
dynamic API to which an app can issue map requests, or do they require
downloading of map data?

OsmAnd (freeware)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.osmand

OsmAnd+ (payware)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.osmand.plus

Uffdah! $25, and you thought $2 was pricey for NCI. Obviously the CZ
app is using the free version. I didn't find a free vs paid comparison
web page at http://osmand.net/ to see just what the hell $25 buys more
than in the free version. OsmAnd and OpenStreets are separate entities,
but OsmAnd looks to be the biggest consumer of OpenStreet data. I'm
just guessing CZ uses OpenStreet, but you'd have to check on that to see
if the app declares whose mapping database it uses. I couldn't find out
at the CZ Github site (the Chinese stopped me from investigating
further).

> Since the NCI app crashed on my Pixel, you'll have to work with me to
> say how the NCI app mapped the tower location. Did it use an
> Ineternet lookup?

Yep. It gets the GPS data in the signal from the tower, and sends the
GPS coordinates to the Google Maps API to show a map. It does NOT go
downloading map databases which due to publishing limitations means that
data is always stale.

Oops, I may be wrong on how CZ gets mapping data. From:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/API

looks like CZ, if it is using OpenStreet, can use an API to request
mapping data from OpenStreet. That would eliminate lag in updating a
mapping database, but it is still compiled from "contributors" to
OpenStreet who walk around with the app running in the background to
record what the app discovers wherever the user's phone travels. If CZ
uses OpenStreets, I would think it would have an option to do the
environ logging of cell towers and their specs. Maybe CZ didn't go that
way, as the logging has to get uploaded. Again, I cannot perform a
whitepaper comparison of the apps (and they have far too much for me to
waste time learning both in detail) since all docs at CZ's Github site
are in Chinese. I don't want to learn Chinese, either, or keep pasting
into Google Translate (which results in bad translations since
grammatical translation is not the same a linguistic translation to
convert from one language to another).

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 05:19:40 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Well, you're back to your lie refusing to acknowlege that CZ didn't even
> exist when NCI came out.

OK. You win. NCI was first. That changes nothing else of what I said.
You paid for less and you called me cheap for not being stupid like you.

> You want to push your agenda regarding
> reputation, and I'm not going to participate anymore. Perhaps you
> spewed your insult before getting down to where I mention the history of
> both app authors, and didn't bother to edit this out before submit.

I take back that NCI copied the source code.
That admission of error doesn't change anything else I said.

NCI is less functional than CZ.

> I already provided the web page with the feature comparison between the
> free and paid versions.

All you really had to do was install both.
That's what I did.

Unfortunately, NCI crashed every time it's called up on my Pixel.
Luckily, you provided the feature comparison which I used to compare.

>
> As for why I purchased, that was over 2 years ago, so I don't remember.

As I said, and as I will continue to say, you can spend your money however
you wish. But just don't call me cheap for me not being stupid. That's all.

It's classic of assholes who are defending their dumb decision to buy
software that they could have gotten open source apps instead to claim that
anyone who doesn't waste their money on substandard apps is cheap.

Admit that you were an asshole just as I admitted I was wrong on the copy.

> Could've been I had been using other apps in their freeware versions,
> decided to pay similar to how I use shareware enough to know if I'm
> keeping it, and went through the apps list to see what others I want to
> buy. If you think $1.99 is costly, you should look at the ParKing
> (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=il.talent.parking.premium)
> that costs $6.99, and I paid for it after a year or two of use.

Like I said, I don't care how you justify wasting your money.

As long as you don't call me cheap just because you felt you had to justify
your buying habits, I don't care how you waste your money.

As an aside, there usually isn't any app I want that I can't get for free,
usually open source; but that's just because I'm not stupid.

> As I
> recall, I paid to get support for more than 1 car, and perhaps automatic
> parking recording using a Bluetooth disconnect from my car (so I didn't
> have to manually add a new way point for parking). Yep, I tried some
> other parking recorders, but in trialing them found they sucked. Free
> doesn't always mean better.

Stop being an asshole. You're still trying to justify your stupid decisions
by intimating that I, somehow, said "free is always better."

Own your stupidity.
Don't foist your stupidity on me as an asshole's defense of your actions.

It's classic projection.

Nobody said "free is always better"; you are welcome to waste your money
any way that you see fit - but don't project your stupidity on me.

> Is LibreOffice better than MS 365. No
> fucking way, but it's free, and I use it, but periodically run into
> limitations, especially in Calc (MS Excel equivalent), that makes be
> consider going back to Excel, like the stupidity in LO's workaround for
> dynamically sized tables linked to charts that is easy with a drag
> handle in Excel. I tried other office suites, but found them lacking.
> LO was lacking, but not enough to yet prod me to dole out for MS 365.

Nobody said free is always better.

You're trying to defend your stupid decisions using arguments that are in
your mind but I didn't say them.

Stop doing that.
It's what assholes do.

And I was hoping you were not an asshole.
Just accept that the NCI app isn't as functional as the CZ app.

It's not a difficult comparison to do.

> By the way, you can still get Windows 10 for free. Just don't register
> it, and ignore the watermarking on the desktop (there are workarounds).
> The trial of Windows 10 never expires. Did I do that? Nope. My new
> build cost around $2600, so the OS cost was trivial. Can I get clothes
> for super cheap at Goodwill? Sure, and I did back when I was destitute,
> but not now when I can afford the retail stores. Do I like deals? Sure
> I do, but not if I'm going to waste more of time in research and
> trialing than the cost to buy. Amazing how so many users consider their
> time as valueless.

I get it that you're embarrassed you made a dumb decision, but I must
repeat nobody said anything about Windows 10, free or otherwise.

This conversation, which you started, is simply comparing the functionality
of NCI with CZ. That's all. And CZ beats NCI in almost every category.

Does NCI do anything better than CZ, by the way?

> Oh, here we go again with the deliberately bogus reputation berating.
> If anyone copied another, it had to be CZ which wasn't around when NCI
> came out. Duh!

I take it back that NCI copied the source code as it's not germane to the
fact that even if NCI was written on a tablet by God herself on top of the
mountain, NCI still would be less functional than CZ.
> I have no interest in the CZ app. NCI does what I need, and a hell of
> lot more that I don't yet understand.

You started this thread on the comparison. Not me.

> I'm not writing a review to post
> at Youtube, or some other site for the socially needy (Facebook,
> Twitter, etc). Unlike you, my time has worth.

There you go again being an asshole because you made a dumb decision.
Don't project your stupidity on me as a way of defending you being dumb.

Own your decisions.

First you claim I'm cheap for not wasting my money on substandard apps.
Now you claim your time is superior to mine because you make dumb moves.

Own your decisions.
Stop projecting your stupidity onto me.

You are doing what assholes do.
Don't you realize that?

Just accept that CZ is a better app and accept that you're happy with the
NCI app which, while doing far less than CZ, serves your minimal needs.

> I don't consider my time
> as valueless, especially when I'm not interested in an app that relies
> on OpenStreets for its map data source.

Stop claiming that anyone who makes smarter decisions than you do must be
(a) cheap, and now, preposterously, (b) wasting their less valuable time.

It's what assholes do who are trying to defend their dumb decisions.
I never said a word about how much time you waste (nor do I care).

I own my own decisions.
Why can't you own yours?

> Actually I just found wifi data in the NCI app.

Good. I was wondering about that because almost all of these apps do the
same stuff in different ways and almost everyone wants to know both wifi
and cellular information.

> I find it worthless, so
> I accuse NCI of also having feature bloat, just not as much as CZ.

That's fine. I don't find it worthless. But you do. That's OK.

What I use the Wi-Fi mostly for is to show people I visit that they can
move their home routers to a different channel, especially 2.4GHz channels.

It's a great visual teaching aid.

I also use it to see what signals are in the area when I'm at a hotspot.

If I don't see a signal, then I don't bother asking the cashier for the
password. Saves my "valuable time" :) <=== joke in case you don't get it.

> An
> app to provide information on cellular communications that wastes code
> and screen space on wifi connectivity, uh huh.

It seems you're really defensive about making a dumb decision.
If you're happy with NCI, then I'm happy for you.

It crashes on my Pixel so I wasn't able to test it out.

> For wifi info, I'd
> rather use an app that is specifically designed for that connection
> method, like WiFi Analyzer from VREM (open source, free) although I'd
> have to research to check if it was best of breed, but I'd only spend
> time on research if I actually had a need for that info instead of just
> idle curiousity to waste my time.

As you likely know, a lot of apps are called "WiFi Analyzer" where the
green icon WiFi Analyzer from https://github.com/noisnogit/WifiAnalyzer
is also in my toolkit. They all do the same things differently.

> However, if I had wifi problems that
> required digging into the technology, I might was a wifi surveying app,
> like NetSpot from Etwok.

There are many wifi and cellular debugging apps and utilities.
I happen to have "Signal Strength", "WiFi Manager", "WLANScanner", "WiFi
Analyzer and Surveyor", "NetSpot", "Network Info II", "IP Geolocator",
"Internet Status", "WiFi Automatic" and many more currently installed on my
Pixel.

>> We can work together to double check but I think the open source app
>> shows what it thinks is the location based on signal strength.
>
> That would be of dubious value.

On 10/3/22 3:19 AM, VanguardLH wrote:

> ...Can I get clothes
> for super cheap at Goodwill? Sure, and I did back when I was destitute,
> but not now when I can afford the retail stores. Do I like deals? Sure
> I do, but not if I'm going to waste more of time in research and
> trialing than the cost to buy. Amazing how so many users consider their
> time as valueless.

You're looking at it wrong! It's a GAME, and the more/better you play
the more you win -- or don't lose, anyway. Yard sales were a social
occasion with our best friends -- one of whom died and the other of whom
developed walking problems -- and whatever we bought was pretty much
gravy. We have more tools (and everything else) than we need now. (Ref
other post.)

Long ago hubby was the company tech hotshot. He wore nice casual
clothes. One day company president stopped by and said it would be
really nice if hubby started wearing suits, especially for client
meetings. We bought a BEAUTIFUL suit for him at the Goodwill store and
I shortened the jacket really nicely (yeah, I used to be able to do
stuff like that). President complimented hubby on his choice. Hubby
said "Yes, and it was only $5 at the Goodwill store." President never
mentioned it again.

When you're retired your time IS valueless in terms of money.

I'm going to talk to a local cellphone repairguy tomorrow afternoon and
maybe let him replace the Pixel2 battery. When the battery is under 30%
the phone reboots when it tries (and fails) to write a photograph.
Since its greatest value is as a camera, this is intolerable. Option 2
is MAYBE an Amazon-refurbished Pixel 4XL, which also has a real
telephoto lens.

Is removing the battery equivalent to a factory reset? Is phone memory
volatile? I'm shocked that this only occurred to me today. Running a
backup even as we speak...

Yeah, I could afford the latest pixel or iPhone and a real phone plan,
but those costs are pure waste, with no additional utility value. Even
as a child I hated wasting money.

I think it's genetic. My mom would only buy steak when it was on sale.
I don't buy it at all, but I hate to cook...

--
Cheers, Bev
Linux: The penguin is mightier than the sword

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> It's classic of assholes who are defending their dumb decision to buy
> software that they could have gotten open source apps instead to
> claim that anyone who doesn't waste their money on substandard apps
> is cheap.

Give the Message-ID of where I called you cheap. So far, the only one
calling yourself cheap has been you.

>> Could've been I had been using other apps in their freeware versions,
>> decided to pay similar to how I use shareware enough to know if I'm
>> keeping it, and went through the apps list to see what others I want
>> to buy.
>
> Like I said, I don't care how you justify wasting your money.

Yes, we all see you are a FOSS prosyletizer. No one really cares here.
This is not a FOSS advocacy newsgroup.

> Own your stupidity.

I don't argue with children. I trialed the candidates available when I
decided I wanted an app that gave cellular information. Your CZ app was
not yet even a wet dream at that time. After choosing, there was no
impetus for me to redo the entire trial testing. Call me lasy since
that may placate your temperament.

> It's what assholes do.

And name calling is what children do. Grow up.

> Just accept that the NCI app isn't as functional as the CZ app.

So far, from what I and you said regarding the features of CZ and NCI, I
am not convinced your statement is true. The only fact that differs the
two that you have harped upon is price, and I really don't care. CZ was
not available when I trialed the candidates, so it was a non-runner no
matter if it was payware or freeware.

>> By the way, you can still get Windows 10 for free. Just don't register
>> it, and ignore the watermarking on the desktop (there are workarounds).
>> The trial of Windows 10 never expires. Did I do that? Nope. My new
>> build cost around $2600, so the OS cost was trivial. Can I get clothes
>> for super cheap at Goodwill? Sure, and I did back when I was destitute,
>> but not now when I can afford the retail stores. Do I like deals? Sure
>> I do, but not if I'm going to waste more of time in research and
>> trialing than the cost to buy. Amazing how so many users consider their
>> time as valueless.
>
> I get it that you're embarrassed you made a dumb decision, but I must
> repeat nobody said anything about Windows 10, free or otherwise.

Nope, not at all. You're the one prosyletizing FOSS, so maybe you would
be interested in how to get that OS for free, if you use it. Instead
you lambaste the info.

> This conversation, which you started, is simply comparing the
> functionality of NCI with CZ. That's all. And CZ beats NCI in almost
> every category.

That has not yet been proven by you or I. CZ is free, you are using it,
I provided a URL to the feature comparison table between editions of
NCI, so you look at which features listed that CZ already has against
the payware versions of NCI that you so vehemently argue against (and
attempted to accuse of theft, but were shown of false accusation), and
report back to the rest of us your results.

You look at the features list for NCI. Then see if CZ has an equal
function. There may not be a direct correlation of features, but some
may be equivalent, like how NCI exports versus how CZ exports. You can
install NCI if you want, but a whitepaper comparison of features based
on the published features is sufficient for many folks. I cannot do the
same, because CZ's author doesn't publish a features list for me to
perform a whitepaper compare. Yes, I can actually read, so a features
comparison based on information is truly possible. I can also read the
nutrition labels on food to compare similar products, too.

Give up on disqualifying NCI as a choice just because it is payware
although it also has a free version. You're not winning that argument
with me, and a features comparison would only add that as a single entry
to denote one is free and the other is free or paid.

> Does NCI do anything better than CZ, by the way?
>
>> Oh, here we go again with the deliberately bogus reputation berating.
>> If anyone copied another, it had to be CZ which wasn't around when NCI
>> came out. Duh!
>
> I take it back that NCI copied the source code as it's not germane to the
> fact that even if NCI was written on a tablet by God herself on top of the
> mountain, NCI still would be less functional than CZ.

You accuse M2Catalyst aka Wilysis of stealing CZ's code to smear NCI's
reputation as though that somehow counts in a feature comparison between
the two. That was you, and I proved you wrong, so now, gee, it's not
germane. You berate NCI because it costs money, but it does have a free
version.

>> I have no interest in the CZ app. NCI does what I need, and a hell of
>> lot more that I don't yet understand.
>
> You started this thread on the comparison. Not me.

I started by mentioning NCI for an app that would give you the
information. You did not yet mention you already had one (CZ) that gave
you that info. As for understanding the IDs of a tower, I bowed out
because I'm not an wifi specialist. Most of what I could find out, and
seems you, too, would be through online searches.

YOU started this subthread by asking for a comparison. I didn't
volunteer a comparison before that post of yours, because you had not
yet mentioned CZ. In fact, in your reply "What does the pay ware do
that the free ware open source app does not do?", I asked for you to be
more specified since I'm not doing work of not interest to me. Only
then did you mention CZ, and then this subthread ensued with your name
calling insults. If calling someone stupid, supporting a code thief,
how you engage a professional discussion on "working together"?

Once, and after, you identified your app choice as CZ, I did offer some
comparison. Since all documentation is written in Chinese, so the
"documentation" (files in the build, not online web pages, FAQ, or help,
all I could base a whitepaper comparison was on the screenshots of CZ,
and then check if NCI had the same features. There were some
differences, but I didn't see much to differentiate them. So, I did
offer some comparisons. Sorry, no matter on much you harp, price was
not a factor in deciding on NCI. I used their free version, I
eventually bought their paid version, and there has been no impetus to
redo trialing all the candidate apps.

Now it's your turn. Look at the feature comparison chart for NCI which
is available online, and to which I gave the URL. Now YOU compare which
features listed for NCI are also equal to CZ. You can even include
features of CZ that you don't see listed for NCI, and I can check if NCI
has those features since feature lists are constrained in how much
information they can present. And don't bias your feature comparison
based on price. You can add that at the end of the comparison noting CZ
is free, but against which edition (free, paid, paid Pro) each
comparison was made to CZ.

I found NCI's comparison table at:

https://www.m2catalyst.com/features

I see they also mention some features at:

https://www.m2catalyst.com/network-cell-info-lite

but did not check if all those were already in their comparison table.
When using their table, and listing which NCI features are covered by
CZ, and which CZ features are not listed for NCI, be sure to include the
features listed on the other web page.

Yeah, as you wished, let's work together. So far, other than price,
your, ahem, arguments have not been convincing that CZ has everything,
and more, than does NCI.

>> I'm not writing a review to post
>> at Youtube, or some other site for the socially needy (Facebook,
>> Twitter, etc). Unlike you, my time has worth.
>
> There you go again being an asshole because you made a dumb decision.
> Don't project your stupidity on me as a way of defending you being dumb.

Oh yes, you elicit such comraderie with your insults. You really impel
me to "work together" with you. Even after all your name calling,
accusing me of calling you cheap, and trying to impugn NCI was a code
thief,

I cannot do a whitepaper comparison of CZ versus NCI, because CZ's
documentation is in Chinese. However, YOU have the CZ app, so you can
do a whitepaper comparison of CZ against NCI, because you speak English,
and NCI's site is in English. Stop harping on price, and do the damn
comparison. I did what I could with the materials available to me to
investigate CZ. No, I'm not installing every damn cell info app to
compile a comparison table of all them. Nope, I'm not installing CZ to
do the comparison, either. I don't install unless I have intent to use,
and nothing yet convinces me CZ is better in features than NCI that I
already have. You can't run NCI on your phone, and I'm not helping
someone troubleshoot problems with an app who name calls, accuses, and
is so opininated as yourself. You don't need to run NCI to to do a
decent comparison of CZ versus NCI. Just look at the feature pages
given to you for NCI, and compare those against the CZ app you can check
on your phone.

On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 05:40:20 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

>> It's classic of assholes who are defending their dumb decision to buy
>> software that they could have gotten open source apps instead to
>> claim that anyone who doesn't waste their money on substandard apps
>> is cheap.
>
> Give the Message-ID of where I called you cheap. So far, the only one
> calling yourself cheap has been you.

I'm not playing your silly game because you need to own up to your own
words, not me. You _repeatedly_ chastised me for not spending money on apps
that I get the functionality for free. If you're that stupid that you don't
even realize what you _repeatedly_ said, then I can't fix your stupidity.

Only an asshole would do what you did and then ask me to prove you did it.
Read your own words. Own them. You wrote them.

I apologized for being wrong on the NCI copying CZ.
I own my words.

You need to look at what you wrote (just look for the dollar sign in your
posts) and then you need to read your own words for yourself.

If you want to lie and say you didn't do what you did, then we're done.

> Yes, we all see you are a FOSS prosyletizer.

You say that as if it's a bad thing, which says more about you than me.
What's wrong with FOSS?

The beauty of FOSS is proprietary code has fewer eyeballs on it.
FOSS, we can hope, can have more eyeballs on them.

However one problem with FOSS is that people "can" shamelessly copy them.
And then they "can" add ads and payments to those shameless copies.

I'm a proponent of rewarding the guys who wrote & published the FOSS code.

> No one really cares here.

Your obvious hatred for FOSS is clear from everything you say.

> This is not a FOSS advocacy newsgroup.

Nor is it a newsgroup for assholes to be calling everyone else cheap for
not wasting their money on apps that do less and cost more than FOSS apps.

The real reason you called me cheap is you were embarrassed that I called
you out on being incredibly stupid in your choices of apps to pay for.

Just own your own stupidity please.
Stop being an asshole just because you're embarrassed by your bad choices.

> I don't argue with children.

Trust me that I get it that you don't know how to deal with someone who is
showing you what an asshole you are so I don't mind you calling me a child.

> I trialed the candidates available when I
> decided I wanted an app that gave cellular information.

That's fine. I do the same thing. As time goes on, there are better apps.
Sometimes you feel the need to look again, sometimes you don't.
As an example, I'm still using Firefox but I'm ready to ditch it.
It was good for a long time, but it's getting worse over time.

If you have a better browser, then I'm all ears, for example.

> Your CZ app was
> not yet even a wet dream at that time. After choosing, there was no
> impetus for me to redo the entire trial testing. Call me lasy since
> that may placate your temperament.

It's normal.
I do the same thing.

I use a barcode scanner that I chose long ago.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.zxing.client.android

Is there a better barcode scanner out there?
Maybe. Probably. But I don't know because the one I chose is working.

If you found a _better_ FOSS barcode scanner, I would thank you.
Not call you cheap.

BTW, when I looked up the URL It says on Google Play "Note that this app
can no longer be updated on Google Play, and there will be no further
releases." so maybe I need to find a better FOSS barcode scanner (or
another source).

I don't know the reason it is no longer being developed though.
https://github.com/zxing/zxing

My point is that we should work together to find the best apps.
It's not a sin to want FOSS apps where the code can be reviewed even if you
think that those who want reviewed code are "proselytizers" all.

> So far, from what I and you said regarding the features of CZ and NCI, I
> am not convinced your statement is true. The only fact that differs the
> two that you have harped upon is price, and I really don't care.

Price is always the LAST criteria when choosing apps.
The first criteria is functionality.

As an obvious example of why that is always the case, an app that does
nothing useful, or that gives the wrong answers, or that is buggy, isn't
even worth "free", let alone a dollar or two.

It's only you who put price in the forefront. Not me.
I put functionality above all and your app is less functional.

Price has nothing to do with functionality even as you think it does.

> Nope, not at all. You're the one prosyletizing FOSS, so maybe you would
> be interested in how to get that OS for free, if you use it. Instead
> you lambaste the info.

Again you deprecate people being able to review the source code.
Why?

What do you hate about the source code being open to public purview?

> That has not yet been proven by you or I. CZ is free, you are using it,
> I provided a URL to the feature comparison table between editions of
> NCI, so you look at which features listed that CZ already has against
> the payware versions of NCI that you so vehemently argue against (and
> attempted to accuse of theft, but were shown of false accusation), and
> report back to the rest of us your results.

I asked before, and I'll ask you again.
What does NCI do that you find useful that CZ doesn't do?

If you can't answer that simple question then it's not worth talking to you
given you're the one who said that all you care about is the price, not me.

I look at functionality.

If any app doesn't have the functionality, subsequently charging me money
isn't going to give that app magical powers of that missing functionality.

> You look at the features list for NCI. Then see if CZ has an equal
> function. There may not be a direct correlation of features, but some
> may be equivalent, like how NCI exports versus how CZ exports. You can
> install NCI if you want, but a whitepaper comparison of features based
> on the published features is sufficient for many folks. I cannot do the
> same, because CZ's author doesn't publish a features list for me to
> perform a whitepaper compare. Yes, I can actually read, so a features
> comparison based on information is truly possible. I can also read the
> nutrition labels on food to compare similar products, too.

The difference between you and me is I make functionality paramount.
You make price paramount.

Don't feel too bad though as lots of people are like you are.
They feel that if they pay more for less that they got a better deal.

> Give up on disqualifying NCI as a choice just because it is payware
> although it also has a free version. You're not winning that argument
> with me, and a features comparison would only add that as a single entry
> to denote one is free and the other is free or paid.

Again and again you are saying that, to you, price is the most important
thing, while you deprecate functionality.

To me, functionality is the most important thing.

The price is the LAST think you look at when comparing apps (or when you're
comparing ANYTHING technical, for that matter).

> You accuse M2Catalyst aka Wilysis of stealing CZ's code to smear NCI's
> reputation as though that somehow counts in a feature comparison between
> the two. That was you, and I proved you wrong, so now, gee, it's not
> germane. You berate NCI because it costs money, but it does have a free
> version.

I said I apologize for saying NCI copied the CZ code.
I said that openly.
I said that publicly.

Do you want to start another thread on that topic so I can say it again?
I don't mind.
Do it.

I'll say it again every time you bring it up.
No matter how many times you gloat, I'll repeat what I said that I was
wrong by assuming that NCI copied the CZ code without evidence of that.

I own my words.

> I started by mentioning NCI for an app that would give you the
> information. You did not yet mention you already had one (CZ) that gave
> you that info.

I would wager that there may not be a single functionality that you have on
your phone that I don't already have on the Pixel that is of use to me.

I don't do a lot of things (like Facebook) on my Pixel that others do, but
I do a lot of things on my phone - so if you want to ask me "what is the
best app" for any particularly utility - you're welcome to ask and I
probably have it if it's a utility that I've needed myself.

> As for understanding the IDs of a tower, I bowed out
> because I'm not an wifi specialist. Most of what I could find out, and
> seems you, too, would be through online searches.

The problem with cellular tower utilities is correct that you said from the
start which is that the apps expect you to know what to do with the data.

I think I know enough now about the various identifiers to be dangerous.

Erholt Rhein <erholtr@pobox.com> wrote:

> VanguardLH wrote:
>
>>> It's classic of assholes who are defending their dumb decision to buy
>>> software that they could have gotten open source apps instead to
>>> claim that anyone who doesn't waste their money on substandard apps
>>> is cheap.
>>
>> Give the Message-ID of where I called you cheap. So far, the only one
>> calling yourself cheap has been you.
>
> I'm not playing your silly game because you need to own up to your own
> words, not me. You _repeatedly_ chastised me for not spending money on apps
> that I get the functionality for free. If you're that stupid that you don't
> even realize what you _repeatedly_ said, then I can't fix your stupidity.

You need to take your meds. Your view of what is said is highly skewed.

> Only an asshole would do what you did and then ask me to prove you did it.
> Read your own words. Own them. You wrote them.

I already owned up that I paid for NCI after using the free version for
a couple years. As to asshole, thief helper, stupid, dumb, and other
aspersions of you against my character, no, I won't own up to YOUR
words. That's your opinion of my choice, and irrelevant to comparing
the features of CZ against NCI.

>> Yes, we all see you are a FOSS prosyletizer.
>
> You say that as if it's a bad thing, which says more about you than me.
> What's wrong with FOSS?

Using FOSS is fine with me. It is when someone devolves into a flamer
by berating choices made by other users. I was dumb, an asshole, a
thief abettor, and so on with your insults.

> The beauty of FOSS is proprietary code has fewer eyeballs on it.

I see that argument all the time about open source code. Yes, someone
could audit it, but rarely does that ever happen. The most the code
ever gets reviewed is when someone generates a variant of the program,
but, according to you, that is stealing.

> However one problem with FOSS is that people "can" shamelessly copy
> them.

See, you think open source cannot be used in other products. Please
review just what is open source. It's public. ANYONE can reuse it.
There is no such thing as shameless copying of open source.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
"Open source is source code that is made freely available for possible
modification and redistribution."

https://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source
"Open source software is software with source code that anyone can
inspect, modify, and enhance."

Sometimes the author of the FOSS aks that anyone reusing their code also
mention the original product. Some authors don't. Depends on the
licensing model attached to the open sourceware.

That you even proposed unfounded (which was proven false) that NCI stole
code from CZ the latter of which is open source shows you don't know
what is open sourceware.

Open source. Yep, anyone can unashamedly copy, modify, and reuse it.

> I'm a proponent of rewarding the guys who wrote & published the FOSS
> code.

Alas, I don't see CZ accepts donations. I've done that, too. I'll
trial the freeware, I could continue using it, but if it has been
sufficiently useful, and I intent to use it, then I donate. I do the
same with shareware.

You aren't rewarding FOSS authors by using their software. The only way
to reward them is through donations if they bothered to setup a payment
system, or by debugging their software and providing professional,
technical, and detailed problem reports, or becoming a contributor to
fix or enhance their code. CZ has a Github project site. Since they
don't accept money, just how are YOU going to reward Zhengzhou CengSan
Information Technology Co., LTD for their Cellular-Z app?

> Nor is it a newsgroup for assholes to be calling everyone else cheap for
> not wasting their money on apps that do less and cost more than FOSS apps.

Hear that timer go bing? Time for your meds again.

> Just own your own stupidity please.
> Stop being an asshole just because you're embarrassed by your bad choices.

I'll own my purchase. I won't own your insults!

> My point is that we should work together to find the best apps.

Nope, not after all your inane insults. You burnt the bridge.

> It's only you who put price in the forefront. Not me.

I mentioned NCI has free and paid versions. You went off on a tangent
with there being a paid version, promoting FOSS, and all the other ...
stuff.

> Price has nothing to do with functionality even as you think it does.

Interesting interpretation of where I said to put pricing at the bottom
of the comparison table.

> Again you deprecate people being able to review the source code.

Please cite just who has audited CZ's code. That something can be done
doesn't mean it has been done.

> What do you hate about the source code being open to public purview?

The nebulous argument that open source can be audited despite the severe
dearth of such auditing by an independent party.

> I asked before, and I'll ask you again.
> What does NCI do that you find useful that CZ doesn't do?

I already gave a comparison listing based on what non-Chinese info I
could find from the app author. I didn't put it into a table, just a
point-list. To do your demanded app-to-app comparison would not only
require me becoming an expert in all of CZ, but also of NCI.

> If you can't answer that simple question

Neither have you. I have the NCI app, and compared it against what I
could find documented of CZ which was mostly just the screenshots. Now
it's your turn. You have the CZ app, so compare it against the features
list published on M2Catalyst's site. I noted the differences that I
saw, not list every feature but then have to leave a bunch of blanks in
the table as to whether or not CZ had them. Just list what differences
you find. I'll agree that the non-differences are what comprise the
equivalency in the two.

You keep complaining that NCI crashes on your phone. With 5+ million
downloads from the Play Store, it wouldn't get that many along with all
the reviews if it was crashing on a vast number of phones. If you
really need NCI to run on your phone, contact the app author with a bug
report. For now, just do a whitepaper comparison: look at the features
list for NCI, and check if CZ has those, or how they differ.

> The difference between you and me is I make functionality paramount.
> You make price paramount.

Oh yes, sure I did, uh huh. I started with the NCI free for a couple
years, decided to pay for more features, and, of course, I'm supposed
compare against another app that didn't yet exist, or discard an already
paid-for app to move to another one that even you declare is very close
in functionality.

> Again and again you are saying that, to you, price is the most important
> thing, while you deprecate functionality.

So, again, look at the list of NCI features that are published at
M2Catalyst's site to check which are the same (really don't need to list
those) and which are different (missing coverage, or implemented
differently). If you find features in CZ that you don't see listed at
M2Catalyst's site, I can check my NCI install to see if I can find them.

> I own my words.

Even those were you insult with dumb, asshole, stupid, and so on with
the name calling? If so, you condemn yourself to a child.

> I would wager that there may not be a single functionality that you have on
> your phone that I don't already have on the Pixel that is of use to me.

Okay, back up that wager by following through. Look at the published
list of NCI's features, and check they are all the same in the CZ app.
If the CZ app has more, mention them. I can then check if the NCI app
has them since authors don't always publicize every feature.

> The problem with cellular tower utilities is correct that you said
> from the start which is that the apps expect you to know what to do
> with the data.

Didn't I mention the Google (and Yandex) geolocation APIs for converting
the cell IDs into latitude and longitude? It looks like NCI is using
the Google geolocation API. You say your CZ instance doesn't have maps,
but the app author's screenshots show otherwise. Perhaps you could
determine if CZ is using the OpenStreets geolocation API to retrieve map
data into the CZ app. They let the APIs figure out how to do the
conversion.

If you are exporting the cell data to a file, well, then it is up to you
do do the lookup. I did find some sites where you can enter either the
CDMA or GSM cell IDs to get back the latitude and longitude. If you
don't want to do the online lookups, well, they had to get the location
data from somewhere, but that's beyond my interest to research.

> I expect the same from you with an apology from you for calling me
> cheap for putting functionality over price in importance.

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 04:13:59 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> You need to take your meds. Your view of what is said is highly skewed.

Look. I get it your butt is hurt that you not only make incredibly stupid
decisions but that you don't like it when I pointed that out to you.

It's OK.
Calm down.

You don't have to try to say I need to take medications because you think
that the price you paid for a substandard app instantly makes it better.

>> The beauty of FOSS is proprietary code has fewer eyeballs on it.
>
> I see that argument all the time about open source code. Yes, someone
> could audit it, but rarely does that ever happen. The most the code
> ever gets reviewed is when someone generates a variant of the program,
> but, according to you, that is stealing.

Well, in the case of some code, you KNOW that people are looking at it,
such as Google looking at all the FOSS YouTube variants.

If Google could find any way to sue the developers of FOSS YouTube clients,
you can bet your ass that they would. But they can't.

That's one advantage of FOSS code. You know the code has been reviewed if
it gives you free functionality that Google charges people for in YouTube.

> There is no such thing as shameless copying of open source.

I have to point out that you don't seem to own the intellect to ascertain
even the slightest bit of pertinent detail.

In this case, you completely missed the part where I clearly (and
repeatedly) said it is better to reward the original developer than to
reward the one who not only copies the code but who also adds
advertisements or who charges money for those copies.

Since you clearly lack the capacity to comprehend critical detail, I
suggest you go back and read what I had said about rewarding the right
developers so that you can re-form your opinions based on what I actually
said - and not just on the little that you comprehended of what I actually
said.

> You aren't rewarding FOSS authors by using their software.

It's interesting that all you care about is money.
There are other ways to reward developers for making a good product, such
as I did when I recommended their product to others, as just one example.

I realize all you can think of is money so that wouldn't occur to you.

> The only way
> to reward them is through donations if they bothered to setup a payment
> system

Again, you put money paramount in importance while I put it last.

> or by debugging their software and providing professional,
> technical, and detailed problem reports, or becoming a contributor to
> fix or enhance their code.

Or by publicly recommending their products to others.

> Hear that timer go bing? Time for your meds again.

Again, I get it that your butt is hurt that you paid more for less.
But it's not my fault you paid more for less. Own your decisions.

>> What do you hate about the source code being open to public purview?
>
> The nebulous argument that open source can be audited despite the severe
> dearth of such auditing by an independent party.

The part I love BEST about open source code is that the big guys who have
all the lawyers can't shut them down by alluding to what the code does.

Take the example of the Google Play Store clients.
They've been around for years and they're much better than Google Play is.

Do you think Google hasn't reviewed their source code?

Do you think if Google found that source code doing something illegal that
Google's lawyers wouldn't shut them down in an instant?

The fact that Google knows all about these FOSS Google Play Store clients
being far better than the proprietary Google Play Store client and that
Google hasn't shut them down, gives the user confidence these FOSS Google
Play Store clients are following Google's rules.

For you to intimate otherwise is not logical, which is why I bring up these
advantages to FOSS code that you don't understand because you don't seem to
be able to comprehend technical detail at the level of a normal person.

> Neither have you.

Well, one obvious difference between the NCI app is it crashes on my phone.

> You keep complaining that NCI crashes on your phone. With 5+ million
> downloads from the Play Store, it wouldn't get that many along with all
> the reviews if it was crashing on a vast number of phones.

I wonder if you realize that you don't comprehend even the slightest level
of technical detail? I don't "keep complaining" that it crashes. I told you
that it crashes when I tried faithfully to see what it does.

You didn't even try to see what cellular-Z does, so I'm way ahead of you.
Yet you don't see this because your butt is hurt that you paid more for
less.

I will repeat that it's not my fault you paid more for less.
Own your own decisions.

> Didn't I mention the Google (and Yandex) geolocation APIs for converting
> the cell IDs into latitude and longitude?

Again and again (and again) you are showing a lack of capacity for detail.

I told you many times that you can get a tower lookup on the net but that's
no guarantee it's accurate (and, in fact, it's well known to NOT be
accurate).

> Never called you a cheapskate. That's some connotation of my words that
> you chose to construe as my meaning.

Look up what you said about me not paying what you paid for your app.
Look up what you said about your "valuable" time.

Own your words.

I get it that you're embarrassed that you made a dumb decision based purely
on price and not on functionality - and I get it that you didn't spend any
time looking at other apps before placing your bets on that substandard app
- but calling me cheap doesn't absolve you of your own dumb decisions just
as saying your time is more valuable than is mine doesn't.

It just means you're embarrassed you make dumb choices that you can't
defend without calling others cheap for making good decisions or that they
waste their time by making good decisions.

> Never called you cheap. That's your delusion.

Go look up exactly what you said and paste it here in response.

Own your words.

> I suspecting I'm in a conversation with a bot instead of a person.

You think I'm not aware that every time you run into a fact that you have
no defense to, that you resort to instant asshole instead of responding to
those facts.

You're so afraid of your own stupidity that you have no defense to facts
other than to claim that all facts must come from a "bot" instead of from
an actual person.

> You use hindsight as your proclamation of superiority by selecting a
> later released product, and claiming they're smarter than someone who
> had to make decisions at an earlier time on whatever solutions were then
> available. I made the best decision AT THE TIME for what solutions were
> available AT THE TIME to research and trial the candidates.

Why is it my fault that you wasted your money on that substandard app?
Own your own decisions.
> In fact, your claim (not yet shown in a comparison by you) is that CZ
> and NCI do the same thing, or most of the important ones. Well, when
> later products show up that are equivalent, where's the impetus to
> change? That I should change to FOSS because it is free, but neglect my
> prior expenditure, and I should get into another learning curve for no
> gain in an equivalent app?

Notice all you really care about is your "prior expenditure" (aka money).
Every decision by you seems to be based purely on money and nothing else.

Somehow your brain calculates that if you spend money on a product, it must
be better than FOSS products which don't cost any money.

It's odd how you think because all you seem to care about is money.

> If there's no bang-for-the-buck, why should I reinvestigate and move to
> a different solution?

Again, all you care about is money.

>> The only difference is that you calling me cheap for not wasting my money
>
> Never called you cheap, and you refuse to point at where I did.

Own your words.
The fact you deny your own words tells me more about you than anything
else.

Look up your own words.
Paste them here.

Then tell me you didn't call me cheap for not wasting my money on a
substandard product like you did.

> Oh yes, discarding price and comparing just on features just must be me
> heavily skewing the results based on price. Time for your meds again.

Notice how you resort to instant asshole whenever anyone points out a fact
that you have no logical defense for.

Your brain is incapable of handling these facts to you claim that anyone
who speaks facts must be on medications.

>> Remember, you started this thread, not me.
>> Own your thread.
>
> You started the thread. You are the OP (original poster).

The fact you just lied so openly tells me more about you than me.
This thread is "which app came first" which YOU started.