Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the cell tower ID?

[Stijn De Jong]

Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?

The Real Bev asked, in another thread, how to get the cell tower ID
information, and, I have the same debugging need since I have two micro
towers set up inside my home (https://u.cubeupload.com/WoN2gQ.jpg) - so
we'd just like to know which tower we are connecting to at any one point in
time.

Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?

[nospam]

In article <o88ahj$99g$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
> cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?

apple doesn't prevent it.

just because you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done.

what's really bizarre is that how to do it was *explained* *to* *you*
at least once before.

[Davoud]

Stijn De Jong:

Apple has a long history of catering to people who have work to do, and
not to hobbyists who like to repeatedly take their computers apart and
put them back together again.

If you want a phone that is stylish, elegant, secure, and that reliably
makes phone calls, you buy an iPhone.

If you want a phone because your hobby is identifying cell tower ID's,
you buy another brand. And don't forget your antivirus apps.
<https://arstechnica.com/security/2017/01/virulent-android-malware-retur
ns-gets-2-million-downloads-on-google-play/>

Choice is good; what's not to like?

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[Lewis]

In message <o88ahj$99g$1...@gioia.aioe.org> Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:
> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
> cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?

Go away, troll.

--
I'm no psychologist (although I play one when I'm picking up chicks over
by the asylum)

[David Taylor]

On 18/02/2017 14:26, Lewis wrote:
[]
> Go away, troll.

Use the killfile, Lewis!

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 02:12:04 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong wrote:

> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
> cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?

Apparently Apple doesn't allow access to the internal API, which is the
reason that iOS devices can't directly query for the unique cell tower id,
nor can they report the frequency bands (which was even hard for Android
until API Level 24 released).

The best reason we can come up with is that Apple users, in general, care
more about security and style than about such technical things as correct
cell tower identification points.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 21:36:47 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
>> cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?
>
> apple doesn't prevent it.
>
> just because you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done.
>
> what's really bizarre is that how to do it was *explained* *to* *you*
> at least once before.

The method you are aware of simply grabs from the Internet (over a data
connection) an average location, not of a cell tower, but of cell phones
connected to that cell tower.

Here's a picture of OpenSignal showing a tower in the middle of a river:
http://people.csail.mit.edu/bkph/images/20111130072559.png

Verbatim quote:
"In OpenSignal ... the ?tower locations? reported are not the actual
antenna coordinates ? but the average of coordinates where cell phones were
when they connected to that antenna"
http://people.csail.mit.edu/bkph/cellular_repeater_inside.shtml

Worse, OpenSignal completely misses femto and micro towers, which you can
easily be connecting to (I have two in my house alone).

The question was not how to look up things on an inaccurate database, but
why Apple doesn't allow direct access to accurate cell tower id and
frequency information.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 23:56:19 -0500, Davoud wrote:

> If you want a phone that is stylish, elegant, secure, and that reliably
> makes phone calls, you buy an iPhone.
>
> If you want a phone because your hobby is identifying cell tower ID's,
> you buy another brand.

This is probably the most correct answer, which is that the Apple MARKETING
organization, admittedly one of the best in the world, knows their customer
well.

Their customer wants style, elegance, safety, and reliable phone calls.

Thanks.

[nospam]

In article <o8adfk$1c5u$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> >> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
> >> cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?
> >
> > apple doesn't prevent it.
> >
> > just because you can't do it doesn't mean it can't be done.
> >
> > what's really bizarre is that how to do it was *explained* *to* *you*
> > at least once before.
>
> The method you are aware of simply grabs from the Internet (over a data
> connection) an average location, not of a cell tower, but of cell phones
> connected to that cell tower.

nope. the method i'm aware of, the same method which has been explained
to you before, the one which you keep ignoring, reads it from the
radio.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 16:29:17 -0500, nospam wrote:

> nope. the method i'm aware of, the same method which has been explained
> to you before, the one which you keep ignoring, reads it from the
> radio.

:)
Let me know what you're smoking when you respond.

Meanwhile, I've brought my signal strength in the mountains, miles from the
nearest T-Mobile tower, up from around ninety to one hundred decibels to
better than sixty decibels!

Here are the results of a scan this morning, for example using just one of
the many apps available in my new "gsm" folder (created just this week):
http://i.cubeupload.com/lgDafB.jpg

In this scan are the unique cell tower identification numbers:
http://i.cubeupload.com/5H7qmX.jpg

The second tab shows the ever-changing raw data in text format:
http://i.cubeupload.com/3gMofW.jpg

While the third tab shows a time-sequence graph showing consistency:
http://i.cubeupload.com/3rDsHX.jpg

There are multiple plots of multiple types of signal strengths:
http://i.cubeupload.com/4HQqh8.jpg

And a quick table of DATA ON/OFF connection percentage statistics:
http://i.cubeupload.com/NQ0xJU.jpg

You can export the entire database in multiple file formats:
http://i.cubeupload.com/W1AAaK.jpg

And there is a nice summary page of the device & sim card information:
http://i.cubeupload.com/hCXKXJ.jpg

Overall, what's most important is that you always know the *correct* unique
cell id of the cell that you're connecting to, which is something that's
just not available on iOS, no matter what you're smoking.

That question was only why Apple doesn't allow apps to report correct cell
tower identification and frequency information (which the newer Android API
allows).

[Bob...@onramp.net]

Now that you have all this information, what is it worth? Why do need
to know the correct id and frequency of the cell you're using? Does it
make your phone operate better? How does it help you communicate? IOW
what the fuck use is it?

>
>That question was only why Apple doesn't allow apps to report correct cell
>tower identification and frequency information (which the newer Android API
>allows).

The answer to your question? Apple obviously doesn't think it's
important enough to screw with.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 17:01:52 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> Now that you have all this information, what is it worth?

I documented (in a companion thread on the Android newsgroup) that I was
able to bring my T-Mobile cellular signal level from around minus one
hundred decibels to as good as minus fifty-three decibels, where's it's
consistently better than minus sixty decibels!

Do you have any idea of how astounding huge that improvement is?

HINT: Just 3 decibels is a doubling of power.
Just 10 decibels is ten times the power.

Here's an iPhone-oriented document which explains my results:
-40 dBm - theoretical maximum (impossible in the real world though)
-50 to -75 dBm - High
-76 to -90 dBm - Medium
-91 to -100 dBm - Low
-101 to -120 dBm - Poor
https://blog.hqcodeshop.fi/archives/253-iPhone-cell-Field-Test-mode.html

Note that the document above shows how you can get your iPhone into field
test mode, which is the best you can do on an iOS device.

> Why do need
> to know the correct id and frequency of the cell you're using? Does it
> make your phone operate better? How does it help you communicate? IOW
> what the fuck use is it?

Since I improved my signal strength by adding both a micro tower and a
femto tower, and since most of my neighbors have micro towers, I'm simply
trying to figure out definitively which tower I'm connecting to at any one
point in time.

None of these towers will be in any online database since they're all local
cellular towers installed in our homes.

>>That question was only why Apple doesn't allow apps to report correct cell
>>tower identification and frequency information (which the newer Android API
>>allows).
>
> The answer to your question? Apple obviously doesn't think it's
> important enough to screw with.

I think you are correct in that the answer to the question is simply
exactly what it says here (verbatim):

"Apple's iOS is a closed environment, which limits the kinds of
applications you can develop."

"Apps need access and gather data about cell and WiFi networks, but Apple
purposefully prevents access to this information."

"There is no way to even ask the user to allow this collection, the
operating system itself just doesn't expose this information to app
developers in the form of API's."

REFERENCE:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/CloudServices/Location/Software

[Bob...@onramp.net]

A lot of words explaining nothing. I see little need for the large
majority of smartphone users. You seem to have done what you needed,
so why are you even discussing this? Use Android and have a ball.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-02-18, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 23:56:19 -0500, Davoud wrote:
>
>> If you want a phone that is stylish, elegant, secure, and that reliably
>> makes phone calls, you buy an iPhone.
>>
>> If you want a phone because your hobby is identifying cell tower ID's,
>> you buy another brand.
>
> This is probably the most correct answer

It's the correct answer.

> Their customer wants style, elegance, safety, and reliable phone calls.

Apple's typical customer has way more important things to do than worry
about which particular cell tower they are connected to when their
connection is already working fine. Tinkerers and hobbyists love
Android for a reason.

Troll on.

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

JR

[nospam]

In article <o8ahhe$1ich$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> Overall, what's most important is that you always know the *correct* unique
> cell id of the cell that you're connecting to, which is something that's
> just not available on iOS, no matter what you're smoking.

it's available, without any smoke, and nobody other than cellular
engineers care.

[dorayme]

In article <rpjhac1rql9eoe28q...@4ax.com>,

Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 22:23:43 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
> <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:
>

...

> >You can export the entire database in multiple file formats:
> >http://i.cubeupload.com/W1AAaK.jpg
> >
> >And there is a nice summary page of the device & sim card information:
> >http://i.cubeupload.com/hCXKXJ.jpg
> >
> >Overall, what's most important is that you always know the *correct* unique
> >cell id of the cell that you're connecting to, which is something that's
> >just not available on iOS, no matter what you're smoking.
>
> Now that you have all this information, what is it worth?

He sold it to the Russians and is now a wealthy man, can't you how
happy he is from his jaunty writing?

--
dorayme

[Aldeberan]

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>> Overall, what's most important is that you always know the *correct* unique
>> cell id of the cell that you're connecting to, which is something that's
>> just not available on iOS, no matter what you're smoking.
>
> it's available, without any smoke, and nobody other than cellular
> engineers care.

If you could manage your signal strength by almost five hundred thousand
times in the span of a minute, all the while knowing exactly what you were
controlling, would you do that?
http://i.cubeupload.com/zN4Dkb.jpg

I, for one, know exactly which towers give me a steady minus sixty dB:
http://i.cubeupload.com/TPLLXF.jpg

And I know which towers give me decreasingly lower and lower signal
strength:
http://i.cubeupload.com/ciKH3h.jpg

Can you control your signal strength by five hundred thousand times?
Why not?

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 17:46:27 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> A lot of words explaining nothing. I see little need for the large
> majority of smartphone users. You seem to have done what you needed,
> so why are you even discussing this? Use Android and have a ball.

I love my larger format iOS iPads for their screen size, and for their
battery life.

When you're trying to figure out how to best improve a lousy cellular
signal, what you need is accurate data. For example, it's easy to visualize
decibels when everything is working fine and steady like this:
http://i.cubeupload.com/TPLLXF.jpg

Yet, look how precipitously the cellular signal fell when I disconnected
each of my personal home towers, where iOS users will never notice that the
towers changed three times in that process - since - on iOS - you can't get
that fast-changing information in an app.
http://i.cubeupload.com/ciKH3h.jpg

With this kind of debugging information I am best able to control and
adjust my signal strength, to make choices as to which devices to enable,
so that I control a range of as much as -51 to -109 decibels (i.e., 58
decibels!) within the span of a single minute.
http://i.cubeupload.com/zN4Dkb.jpg

I not only controlled the received signal strength by almost five hundred
thousand times, but I knew exactly which (of multiple) towers I was using
in that one-minute process. This would be impossible on my Apple iOS
devices.

I simply asked why.

[Stijn De Jong]

On 19 Feb 2017 00:03:42 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Apple's typical customer has way more important things to do than worry
> about which particular cell tower they are connected to when their
> connection is already working fine. Tinkerers and hobbyists love
> Android for a reason.

What if the cellular signal is -100 decibels?
What does that "typical Apple customer" do then?

[nospam]

In article <o8atvb$c9k$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> > Apple's typical customer has way more important things to do than worry
> > about which particular cell tower they are connected to when their
> > connection is already working fine. Tinkerers and hobbyists love
> > Android for a reason.
>
> What if the cellular signal is -100 decibels?
> What does that "typical Apple customer" do then?

same thing a 'typical android customer' does when they see 1 or 2 bars
on the signal strength meter, move to where the signal is better or get
a femtocell . there's *no* need to see '-100 db' to know that reception
is weak, and signal strength isn't what matters anyway, s/n ratio is.

and for those apple users who want to know dbm, they can find out. it's
not that tough, except for you.

[nospam]

In article <o8atv7$c9k$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Aldeberan

<alde...@sirius.edu> wrote:

>
> >> Overall, what's most important is that you always know the *correct*
> >> unique
> >> cell id of the cell that you're connecting to, which is something that's
> >> just not available on iOS, no matter what you're smoking.
> >
> > it's available, without any smoke, and nobody other than cellular
> > engineers care.
>
> If you could manage your signal strength by almost five hundred thousand
> times in the span of a minute, all the while knowing exactly what you were
> controlling, would you do that?

what for? the phone is *already* doing exactly that (actually, the mtso
is, not the phone), and doing a *much* better job than you could ever
hope to do.

a cellular engineer might want to know the exact numbers so that they
can tune the network, but that's about it, and they have far more
sophisticated equipment to do so.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-02-18 16:14, Stijn De Jong wrote:

> The best reason we can come up with is that Apple users, in general, care
> more about security and style than about such technical things as correct
> cell tower identification points.

AT&T asked for and got the ability, via a flag in the SIM card to
disable the manual selection of network. (Prevents users to scan to see
if T-Mobile is available where they are). (This is not in the carrier.plist)

Most carriers disable the viewing and editing of the APNs in the data menu.

Doubtful carriers would take kindly to apple publishiung an API to get
technical details on what frequencies, toiwer IDs etc are in use.

The original "field test" more on the iPhone provide a lot of info on IP
addresses used (for the tunnel and the public IP) and some of the
technical info (but not what carriers were seen and at what frequencies)

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 21:34:57 -0500, nospam wrote:

> what for? the phone is *already* doing exactly that (actually, the mtso
> is, not the phone), and doing a *much* better job than you could ever
> hope to do.

You are completely correct in that the phone, itself, is already switching
to the best tower. I can see that, in fact, when I switch off my micro
towers (I need the correct name for what to call them) inside my house.

When I use the MIT non-Google "CellTracker" APK, I can easily visually see
on a Google map the cell towers skitter about the valley below me, most of
which, surprisingly, are fifteen miles (driving anyway) away, and each
tower is easily five or ten miles from each other.
http://people.csail.mit.edu/bkph/CellTracker.shtml

> a cellular engineer might want to know the exact numbers so that they
> can tune the network, but that's about it, and they have far more
> sophisticated equipment to do so.

Again, you are completely correct in that I'm acting, sort of, as a nascent
"cellular engineer" in that I'm setting up a (lousy) "laboratory"
environment of multiple internal cell micro towers.

[Note: I call them micro or femto towers, but I'm not sure what the term is
that you guys would recognize since I see both terms in the public record.]

Since I'm setting up my own cellular network, so to speak, I'm acting as
that "cellular engineer", only I don't have their education nor their
tools, and yet, I have the common goal of making -100 decibels be half a
million times stronger.

I also have to decide which device is best, because T-Mobile has since
informed me that any one customer is only allowed a single device, and I
already have two (and asked for a third).

If it comes down to the fact that I have to *return* one of the two micro
towers that I currently have, I need to assess which of the two is more
effective.

How am I to make that assessment if I don't even know exactly which tower
I'm connected to? Of course, I can turn them on and off constantly, and
that slow process will tell me which is best - but I can also tell which
one I'm connected to *without* having to wait the time to turn them on and
off.

I should note that it takes a loooooooooooong-ass time for the
router-connected device to come up to speed. It actually takes about two
hours or more (I tested it last night and fell asleep before the phone
connected to it - and had to look in the log files to figure out when the
phone connected to it, in fact).

So, sure, without these tools I can wait the few hours for each test, or,
with the tools, I can run the tests back to back.

Anyway, the question is and was that it befuddles me why Apple won't let
the user do such things.

The answer came back, rather clearly, that the Apple user doesn't want to
do these things.

OK. That's a fair answer.
You'll never hear me say that Apple MARKETING isn't perfectly tuned to
their customer's needs, wants, and desires.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 21:34:58 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> What if the cellular signal is -100 decibels?
>> What does that "typical Apple customer" do then?
>
> same thing a 'typical android customer' does when they see 1 or 2 bars
> on the signal strength meter, move to where the signal is better or get
> a femtocell . there's *no* need to see '-100 db' to know that reception
> is weak, and signal strength isn't what matters anyway, s/n ratio is.

You're completely correct (especially about the headroom).

However, you're focusing on decibels, which isn't what the subject line is
about.

The subject line is about unique tower IDs.
Specifically, why Apple won't let users know the tower ID.

The reason for needing unique tower ids is apparent when you set up your
own network (like I did) which contains multiple towers inside the same
home, and when most of your neighbors also have a tower inside their house.

The answer came back that Apple users don't care to know such things,
while, clearly, based on the plethora of Android tools in this arena,
Android users do care to have this information.

That's pretty much the occam's razor answer.

> and for those apple users who want to know dbm, they can find out. it's
> not that tough, except for you.

You have a knack for insulting people even when you, yourself, completely
misrepresent the question.

The question here was *never* about decibels.
Look at the subject line.

The question is why Apple doesn't allow its users to see the unique cell
ID.

Clearly plenty of Android users care since there are dozens of apps that
report this information. I've whittled down my app list to four apps, such
that I not only get cell tower IDs but I also get logging of cell towers,
cell tower locations (based on database lookups), and, if I had a newer
Android API, I'd even get exact frequency information.

This is useful information for anyone who has multiple towers in their
home, or who has neighbors with micro towers in theirs, or, for people with
lousy cell signal but who don't know why.

None of this is useful information for the hoi polloi, who simply need a
phone to talk and text and watch videos.

For me, the "mobile device" is a "tool"; not a toy.

For them, it's a tool also; but it's like the difference between pruning
clips and a chainsaw.

That's OK. If all you do is prune bushes, then a chainsaw is never needed.
I understand that.

I just don't understand why anyone would want a tool that doesn't do as
many jobs as another tool does. But certainly millions of people do, so,
who am I to say why.

That's why I asked you the question.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 00:47:07 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

>> The best reason we can come up with is that Apple users, in general, care
>> more about security and style than about such technical things as correct
>> cell tower identification points.
>
>
> AT&T asked for and got the ability, via a flag in the SIM card to
> disable the manual selection of network. (Prevents users to scan to see
> if T-Mobile is available where they are). (This is not in the carrier.plist)

This is very interesting.

It makes complete sense, from a business standpoint, that AT&T would make a
deal with Apple to ensure that AT&T towers are used if AT&T has to pay
T-Mobile for those connections.

However, even on my Android phone, I can't "scan" for AT&T towers unless I
put an AT&T SIM card into a slot.

However, if I turn on roaming, I wonder what I will see as the connected
tower? I will try that and try to connect, over the next few days, to an
AT&T tower to see if it can do that.

> Most carriers disable the viewing and editing of the APNs in the data menu.

You're talking, I think, about "data" connections.
You're ahead of me in technical knowledge, since I'm only working on the
GSM cellular "voice" part of the connection.

> Doubtful carriers would take kindly to apple publishiung an API to get
> technical details on what frequencies, toiwer IDs etc are in use.

I'm not sure if you're only talking about data or about voice.
For voice, certainly the Android API allows the phone to access the unique
cell id of the towers.

How do the carriers feel about that?

> The original "field test" more on the iPhone provide a lot of info on IP
> addresses used (for the tunnel and the public IP) and some of the
> technical info (but not what carriers were seen and at what frequencies)

I think the field test mode is nice, and this article implies that the
unique cell ids "can" be seen but I haven't seen them yet with my iPad.
https://blog.hqcodeshop.fi/archives/253-iPhone-cell-Field-Test-mode.html

This blog describes how an iPhone user tried to get the unique cell id:
http://www.ahmadrifky.com/ict-stuff/iphone-measuring-your-carrier-operator-signalbandwidth-license-and-location-in-just-a-split-seconds

Most people resorted to an Internet lookup, as shown here, but that only
works for established base towers, not for the micro towers I'm trying to
uniquely identify at home.
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r24886065-field-test-specific-tower-ID

Here's an apple forums discussion on what the field test mode actually
does, so, the good news is that there are some apple users who care.
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4995211?start=0&tstart=0

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-02-19, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:
>
> The reason for needing unique tower ids is apparent when you set up your
> own network (like I did) which contains multiple towers inside the same
> home, and when most of your neighbors also have a tower inside their house.

If the towers are in working order, there's no reason to know the ID.
Nice try, NO SALE.

> The answer came back that Apple users don't care to know such things,
> while, clearly, based on the plethora of Android tools in this arena,
> Android users do care to have this information.

Most Apple users have more important things to do than babysit and
tinker; as long as they actually have a good connection, they are happy
to focus their time on getting shit done (productivity is valued above
all else). Many Android users, on the other hand, value tinkerability
over efficiency and productivity, so are happy being distracted by lots
of minor features and relatively meaningless details.

> I just don't understand why anyone would want a tool that doesn't do as
> many jobs as another tool does. But certainly millions of people do, so,
> who am I to say why.
>
> That's why I asked you the question.

You'll never understand because your personal values put tinkerability
above all else, which means productivity takes a back seat. You'll
probably never understand the mindset of someone who values productivity
over all else.

[Stijn De Jong]

On 19 Feb 2017 14:58:41 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Most Apple users have more important things to do than babysit and
> tinker; as long as they actually have a good connection, they are happy
> to focus their time on getting shit done (productivity is valued above
> all else).

Some Apple users seem to care about technical things.

Q: Description of Field Test Mode Data...
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4995211?start=0&tstart=0

> Many Android users, on the other hand, value tinkerability
> over efficiency and productivity, so are happy being distracted by lots
> of minor features and relatively meaningless details.

There are some Apple users who want accurate technical information:
https://blog.hqcodeshop.fi/archives/253-iPhone-cell-Field-Test-mode.html

> You'll never understand because your personal values put tinkerability
> above all else, which means productivity takes a back seat. You'll
> probably never understand the mindset of someone who values productivity
> over all else.

Some Apple users stress the system.
http://www.ahmadrifky.com/ict-stuff/iphone-measuring-your-carrier-operator-signalbandwidth-license-and-location-in-just-a-split-seconds

[Jolly Roger]

Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 21:34:57 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>> what for? the phone is *already* doing exactly that (actually, the mtso
>> is, not the phone), and doing a *much* better job than you could ever
>> hope to do.
>
> You are completely correct in that the phone, itself, is already switching
> to the best tower.

Translation: "Sure, the phone always uses the best tower signal, but I have
nothing better to do than babysit it; so I want to see the cell tower ID
anyway."

> I'm acting as
> that "cellular engineer", only I don't have their education nor their
> tools

The tinkerer's manifesto.

> I also have to decide which device is best

Which can be easily done without knowing the cell ID.

> If it comes down to the fact that I have to *return* one of the two micro
> towers that I currently have, I need to assess which of the two is more
> effective.
>
> How am I to make that assessment if I don't even know exactly which tower
> I'm connected to? Of course, I can turn them on and off constantly

"Constantly" is hyperbolic bullshit. Turn one on, check the signal in
multiple locations. Then check it with the other one. Done deal.

- but I can also tell which
> one I'm connected to *without* having to wait the time to turn them on and
> off.

With both on at the same time competing with each other in the same space
your results may be skewed anyway. Better to test one at a time for better
accuracy. Also no need to keep track of cell IDs - imagine that...

[Jolly Roger]

Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> On 19 Feb 2017 14:58:41 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Most Apple users have more important things to do than babysit and
>> tinker; as long as they actually have a good connection, they are happy
>> to focus their time on getting shit done (productivity is valued above
>> all else).
>
> Some Apple users seem to care about technical things.

There are *many* Apple users who are technical in nature. And many of them
are fully aware of field test mode. You don't have to value tinkerability
over productivity to care about technical things. That's a distinction that
is clearly lost on you due to your narrow views.

[nospam]

In article <o8c9ls$6i0$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> Anyway, the question is and was that it befuddles me why Apple won't let
> the user do such things.

apple doesn't stop anyone from doing those things.

just because you can't figure it out doesn't mean it's impossible.

[nospam]

In article <o8casv$8dl$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> >> What if the cellular signal is -100 decibels?
> >> What does that "typical Apple customer" do then?
> >
> > same thing a 'typical android customer' does when they see 1 or 2 bars
> > on the signal strength meter, move to where the signal is better or get
> > a femtocell . there's *no* need to see '-100 db' to know that reception
> > is weak, and signal strength isn't what matters anyway, s/n ratio is.
>
> You're completely correct (especially about the headroom).
>
> However, you're focusing on decibels, which isn't what the subject line is
> about.

*you* mentioned decibels, not me.

you're trying to move the goalposts once again.

> The subject line is about unique tower IDs.
> Specifically, why Apple won't let users know the tower ID.

once again, apple is not stopping anyone from doing what you ask.

the point is that there is *no* need whatsoever to do it.

> The reason for needing unique tower ids is apparent when you set up your
> own network (like I did) which contains multiple towers inside the same
> home, and when most of your neighbors also have a tower inside their house.

nonsense.

if you set up a femtocell, the phone will choose that over the much
weaker signal from a tower. it will not connect to a neighbor's femto
(and even if it did, who cares). there will be an indication in the
status bar. there is zero need for determining and logging tower ids.

> The answer came back that Apple users don't care to know such things,
> while, clearly, based on the plethora of Android tools in this arena,
> Android users do care to have this information.
>
> That's pretty much the occam's razor answer.

nope.

and android users don't run around checking tower ids any more than
anyone else does.

> > and for those apple users who want to know dbm, they can find out. it's
> > not that tough, except for you.
>
> You have a knack for insulting people even when you, yourself, completely
> misrepresent the question.

you have an obsession to insult apple users, going well out of your way
to do so.

> The question here was *never* about decibels.
> Look at the subject line.

it was about *decibels*. look at what *you* wrote:
> >> What if the cellular signal is -100 decibels?
> >> What does that "typical Apple customer" do then?

remaining idiocy snipped.

[Stijn De Jong]

On 19 Feb 2017 15:25:09 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> How am I to make that assessment if I don't even know exactly which tower
>> I'm connected to? Of course, I can turn them on and off constantly
>
> "Constantly" is hyperbolic bullshit. Turn one on, check the signal in
> multiple locations. Then check it with the other one. Done deal.

One thing you don't know, that I do know, because I can see the towers
bouncing about, is that the towers do change constantly.
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZHepme.jpg

Within seconds sometimes, the connected tower changes to another tower in
another direction which can be ten or fifteen miles from me and ten or
fifteen miles from each other.

Without these applications, I wouldn't know this information.
http://i.cubeupload.com/OwXjWZ.jpg

Sometimes the signal strength changes by a lot, sometimes it doesn't change
by much when the towers bounce, just as sometimes the signal fluctuates
when the towers don't bounce. So the signal strength doesn't tell me
anything about the towers.
http://i.cubeupload.com/407ihh.jpg

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-02-19, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:
> On 19 Feb 2017 15:25:09 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>>> How am I to make that assessment if I don't even know exactly which tower
>>> I'm connected to? Of course, I can turn them on and off constantly
>>
>> "Constantly" is hyperbolic bullshit. Turn one on, check the signal in
>> multiple locations. Then check it with the other one. Done deal.
>

> [ramblings about unrelated things omitted]

Get back to me when you can respond to what I said.

Troll on.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 10:43:15 -0500, nospam wrote:

> apple doesn't stop anyone from doing those things.
>
> just because you can't figure it out doesn't mean it's impossible.

When you're finished smoking whatever it is you're smoking, then get back
to us.

Meanwhile, I have complete log files of all the cell antennas I've been
connecting to...

a. NetMonitor logs are the most customizable
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZAcsok.jpg
b. GSM Signal Monitoring has great csv logs
http://i.cubeupload.com/69bgcS.jpg
b. CellTracker logs manually (by pressing the blue arrows)
http://i.cubeupload.com/FhY2UX.jpg

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 10:43:16 -0500, nospam wrote:

> and android users don't run around checking tower ids any more than
> anyone else does.

I'm not so sure of that, given the plethora of freeware Android-based
solutions for tower id management and logging.

While I would have preferred to run my tests on the larger-screen iPad,
I have completed my initial tests on the Android free apps though.
I know I'm done with the first phase when I've uninstalled all the apps
that irk me.

I'm left with these four, each of which does something nice that the others
don't do as well.
https://i.cubeupload.com/vKLAu8.jpg

While some of these apps do wifi scanning, I keep a separate folder for the
best freeware wifi scanners, as shown below:
https://i.cubeupload.com/Z1qvPZ.jpg

If folks want to save time, you can't go wrong loading just one or more of
those four best freeware apps (in my tests anyway) for cellular debugging.

Network Cell Info Lite, version 3.30:
http://i.cubeupload.com/HoKTav.jpg
http://wilysis.com/networkcellinfo
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.wilysis.cellinfolite

Netmonitor, version 1.2.15:
https://i.cubeupload.com/TfDJaS.jpg
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.parizene.netmonitor

MIT CellTracker, for Android 4.2 and up:
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZHepme.jpg
http://people.csail.mit.edu/bkph/CellTracker

GSM Signal Monitoring, version 4.02:
http://i.cubeupload.com/V9O0Gg.jpg
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.signalmonitoring.gsmsignalmonitoring

You'll also want this, but I put it in my WiFi folder instead:
WiGle WiFi Wardriving (which also reports cellular towers):
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZPva3O.jpg
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.wigle.wigleandroid

Unfortunately, the freeware version of Network Signal Info crashed a lot
so I uninstalled it, but if it works for you, it's also very good.
Network Signal Info, version 3.63.01:
http://i.cubeupload.com/2zK8Ys.jpg
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.android.telnet

If you want log files, you are limited to these three, in order:

a. NetMonitor logs are the most customizable
http://i.cubeupload.com/ZAcsok.jpg
b. GSM Signal Monitoring has great csv logs
http://i.cubeupload.com/69bgcS.jpg
b. CellTracker logs manually (by pressing the blue arrows)
http://i.cubeupload.com/FhY2UX.jpg

As always, I hope these detailed summaries and research and tests help
others now, and in the future. Of course, if you have improvements, please
share!

[nospam]

In article <o8clbv$rh0$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> One thing you don't know, that I do know, because I can see the towers
> bouncing about, is that the towers do change constantly.

that's how it's supposed to work.

> Within seconds sometimes, the connected tower changes to another tower in
> another direction which can be ten or fifteen miles from me and ten or
> fifteen miles from each other.
>
> Without these applications, I wouldn't know this information.

unless you're a cellular engineer, which you are not, it makes
absolutely no difference whatsoever.

[nospam]

In article <o8crn5$178e$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> > apple doesn't stop anyone from doing those things.
> >
> > just because you can't figure it out doesn't mean it's impossible.
>
> When you're finished smoking whatever it is you're smoking, then get back
> to us.

it ain't me who is smoking stuff.

> Meanwhile, I have complete log files of all the cell antennas I've been
> connecting to...

nobody cares what you have.

[FPP]

On 2017-02-18 21:14:25 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:

> On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 02:12:04 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get
>> the cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?
>
> Apparently Apple doesn't allow access to the internal API, which is the
> reason that iOS devices can't directly query for the unique cell tower id,
> nor can they report the frequency bands (which was even hard for Android
> until API Level 24 released).

>
> The best reason we can come up with is that Apple users, in general, care
> more about security and style than about such technical things as correct
> cell tower identification points.

Most Apple users, in general, care more about how many licks it takes
to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop, than they ever have about

correct cell tower identification points.

--
Trump at his press conference: “To be honest, I inherited a mess.
Stephen Colbert: “No. You inherited a fortune. We elected a mess.”

[FPP]

On 2017-02-19 14:56:55 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:

> However, even on my Android phone...

... and boom goes the dynamite.

Finally! Now... was *that* so hard?

[Davoud]

FPP:

> Most Apple users, in general, care more about how many licks it takes
> to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop, than they ever have about
> correct cell tower identification points.

The overwhelming majority, I would posit. And that's because the former
question is far more important than the latter.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[Stijn De Jong 'Stijn De Jong]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:38:36 -0500, Davoud wrote:

>> Most Apple users, in general, care more about how many licks it takes
>> to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop, than they ever have about
>> correct cell tower identification points.
>
> The overwhelming majority, I would posit. And that's because the former
> question is far more important than the latter.

I think we arrived at the correct answer to the question which is that the
great majority of Apple iOS users don't care about seeing signal strength
graphs, trends, logs, tower ids, and locations (for both WiFi and for
cellular).

What amazing is that none of those who posted seem to realize that you're
veritable cripples.

You're almost completely blind and yet - you don't even realize it.

You're literally like a person born almost blind who has no idea they can't
easily see what everyone else can easily see, where those who can see can
make more intelligent decisions about radio placement and setup and
(correct) efficacy.

We measure.
You just guess.

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-22 03:24:07 +0000, Stijn De Jong 'Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:

> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 14:38:36 -0500, Davoud wrote:
>
>>> Most Apple users, in general, care more about how many licks it takes
>>> to get to the center of a Tootsie Roll Pop, than they ever have about
>>> correct cell tower identification points.
>>
>> The overwhelming majority, I would posit. And that's because the former
>> question is far more important than the latter.
>
> I think we arrived at the correct answer to the question which is that the
> great majority of Apple iOS users don't care about seeing signal strength
> graphs, trends, logs, tower ids, and locations (for both WiFi and for
> cellular).

This might seem odd to you, but the "great majority" of Android users
also don't care about seeing any of that stuff.

BTW: WTF is "the great majority" of anything?


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[nramp.net]

My guess is that you're a FOS nerd.

[nospam]

In article <o8j08l$1h5e$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong 'Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> I think we arrived at the correct answer to the question which is that the
> great majority of Apple iOS users don't care about seeing signal strength
> graphs, trends, logs, tower ids, and locations (for both WiFi and for
> cellular).

nor do the great majority of android users, windows phone users or any
other cellphone users.

however, for those few who are interested, can get the info, even on
ios.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:58:47 -0500, nospam wrote:

> however, for those few who are interested, can get the info, even on
> ios.

You either have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Or, you know, and you just blatantly lie.

I've never been able to figure out which one it is; but the end result is
the same anyway - which is that you're flat out wrong.

But we already got the answer to the question, which is that the majority
(thanks savageduck!) of iOS users wouldn't know what to do with the stated
tools any more than a blind person would know what to do with a
kaleidoscope.

iOS users just punch buttons.

[nospam]

In article <o8j7r4$1ptr$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> > however, for those few who are interested, can get the info, even on
> > ios.
>
> You either have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
> Or, you know, and you just blatantly lie.

both wrong.

> I've never been able to figure out which one it is; but the end result is
> the same anyway - which is that you're flat out wrong.

nothing i've said is wrong.

more accurately, what you have never been able to figure out is how to
do the things on ios that you claim you want to do, *despite* numerous
people telling you exactly how to do it.

> But we already got the answer to the question, which is that the majority
> (thanks savageduck!) of iOS users wouldn't know what to do with the stated
> tools any more than a blind person would know what to do with a
> kaleidoscope.

nor would the majority of android users, or anyone else for that matter.

> iOS users just punch buttons.

yep, and unlike you, they get results.

for some reason, you can't even manage to do that.

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-22 05:33:26 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:
>
>
> But we already got the answer to the question, which is that the majority
> (thanks savageduck!) of iOS users wouldn't know what to do with the stated
> tools any more than a blind person would know what to do with a
> kaleidoscope.

Which thumb did you suck that BS out of?
How many times do I have to tell you to stop fabricating things that I
have never said, or alter context?

Here is the actual context of what I wrote on the subject:

Stijn, Aardvarks, AArdvarks, Danny D, John Harmon, Martin Chuzzlewit
II, Raymond Spruance III, Algeria Horan, Horace Algiers, Karl Schultz,
Henry Jones, Conradt, P. Ng, Paul M. Cook, and many others wrote the
following:

"I think we arrived at the correct answer to the question which is that
the great majority of Apple iOS users don't care about seeing signal

strength graphs, trends, logs,tower ids, and locations (for both WiFi
and for cellular)".

Savageduck responded:

"This might seem odd to you, but the "great majority" of Android users

also don't care about seeing any of that stuff."

You are painting yourself more and more as a lying troll.

> iOS users just punch buttons.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Lloyd Parsons]

utter horseshit! Who cares about all that info, what matters is can I
make that call, text or surf the web. All the rest is
techno-masturbation.

[Lloyd Parsons]

On 2017-02-22 05:33:26 +0000, Stijn De Jong said:

> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:58:47 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>> however, for those few who are interested, can get the info, even on
>> ios.
>
> You either have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
> Or, you know, and you just blatantly lie.
>
> I've never been able to figure out which one it is; but the end result is
> the same anyway - which is that you're flat out wrong.

That you can't figure it out is no surprise.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-02-22, Lloyd Parsons <em...@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2017-02-22 03:24:07 +0000, Stijn De Jong 'Stijn De Jong said:
>
>> What amazing is that none of those who posted seem to realize that you're
>> veritable cripples.
>>

>> [remaining trollish insults omitted]

>
> utter horseshit! Who cares about all that info, what matters is can I
> make that call, text or surf the web. All the rest is
> techno-masturbation.

Stick around for a while and you'll learn this particular nym-switching
useless Apple-hating dimwit troll *lives* for this sort of public
masturbation. ; )

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-02-22, Lloyd Parsons <em...@domain.com> wrote:

Yep. He's publicly admitted he has mental disorders, too.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 09:05:04 -0600, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> That you can't figure it out is no surprise.

I realize nospam is just lying because he knows (as does anyone
intelligent) that it's impossible to do the things I said on an iOS device
- but you - you seem to actually believe what you wrote - without a shred
of fact.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 09:04:11 -0600, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> Who cares about all that info, what matters is can I
> make that call, text or surf the web. All the rest is
> techno-masturbation.

a. You call
b. You text
c. You surf

To you, everything else is "techno-masturbation".

[Stijn De Jong]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 21:53:46 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

>> But we already got the answer to the question, which is that the majority
>> (thanks savageduck!) of iOS users wouldn't know what to do with the stated
>> tools any more than a blind person would know what to do with a
>> kaleidoscope.
>
> Which thumb did you suck that BS out of?
> How many times do I have to tell you to stop fabricating things that I
> have never said, or alter context?

pot kettle black

It's understandable that you completely misunderstood what I had meant when
I said "thanks savageduck", which was that you (correctly) admonished me
that "WTF is 'the great majority' of anything?"

I listened, and learned, and removed the redundant adjective "great" and
then simply and politely thanked you for that advice.

[Stijn De Jong]

On 22 Feb 2017 16:02:29 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

>> That you can't figure it out is no surprise.
>
> Yep. He's publicly admitted he has mental disorders, too.

What amazes me is how your every post is devoid of technical value.

[Jolly Roger]

Cry harder, Nancy.

[Savageduck]

...but you completely altered the context be something other than you
just tried to spin, and nothing close to my original response.
It seems like you are auditioning for either Kelly-Anne Conway's, or
Sean Spicer's alternate facts/reality, spin doctor job.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:46:22 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

> ...but you completely altered the context be something other than you
> just tried to spin, and nothing close to my original response.

You are trying to turn a simple sincere thank you for correcting my English
(which you are well aware I always appreciate) into a complex conspiracy
spun out of your own mind.

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-22 19:21:47 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:

> On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 08:46:22 -0800, Savageduck wrote:
>
>> ...but you completely altered the context be something other than you
>> just tried to spin, and nothing close to my original response.
>
> You are trying to turn a simple sincere thank you for correcting my English

...but it wasn't that, was it?

> (which you are well aware I always appreciate) into a complex conspiracy
> spun out of your own mind.

Yeah! Right!
--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 00:37:50 -0500, nospam wrote:

> nothing i've said is wrong.

I appreciate your humor.
In fact, you make me smile almost every day with what you post.

When you post to the gullible, I just laugh as I did when I read the news
that the North Korean embassy has already proclaimed the two women innocent
who are suspected of having fatally poisoned Kim John Nam.

Only the naive wouldn't chuckle "how would they know?"

Whenever you post, you preach to a crowd of unsophisticated suckers who are
easily taken in, much like the ludicrous statement by the North Korean
embassy in Kuala Lumpur demanding "If the toxins were on their hands then
how is it possible that these female suspects could still be alive?"

Just as the N. Korean officials take advantage of their unsophisticated
audience, you attempt to deceive in every sentence, yet, you know, at all
times, that the proof is obvious that your beloved product can't do the
things stated (and probably never will).

The reason is simple.
Apple won't let them.

[Davoud]

Stijn De Jong:

> > I think we arrived at the correct answer to the question which is that the
> > great majority of Apple iOS users don't care about seeing signal strength
> > graphs, trends, logs, tower ids, and locations (for both WiFi and for
> > cellular).

> > What amazing is that none of those who posted seem to realize that you're
> > veritable cripples.

> > You're almost completely blind and yet - you don't even realize it...

> > We measure.
> > You just guess.

Lloyd Parsons:

> utter horseshit! Who cares about all that info, what matters is can I

> make that call, text or surf the web....

Bingo. There is definitely a cripple here, a mental cripple. He would
be appalled to know that, for the reasons you cited, we don't even
guess; it works and that's the end of it. Mr. De Jong's obsession is
one of the strangest that I have seen in a long time. It earned him
pride of place in my kill-file.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

But you've been told how to do it. So who's unsophisticated?

[dorayme]

In article <eh5nit...@mid.individual.net>,

Lloyd Parsons <em...@domain.com> wrote:

> what matters is can I
> make that call, text or surf the web. All the rest is
> techno-masturbation.

What matters to you and to many people. Not to all people.

X-masturbation, what could it really mean? We know what it means when
the X is a penis or a vagina, the idea being self-pleasure mainly.
Mainly because sometimes, as I understand, it is required in the case
of men to provide specimens for medical purposes. Mostly it is merely
for pleasure.

So, we have pleasure mostly. And we have utility on some occasions. If
it were useful to go into technical capacities of hardware, you might
want to call it masturbation on the model of the above. But then, it
is hardly anything derogatory. If you are suggesting the technical
desires (hmm...) of the OP is a case of pure wanking for no real
useful benefit, then perhaps you should be sure that the OP is not
genuinely concerned about utility and is merely getting off on the
facts of the matter.

That is all I can think to say on this matter at this point in time.

--
dorayme

[Lloyd Parsons]

Yeah, I do all those thing, plus much more. NONE of which is like the
drivel you come up with in nearly every post.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:02:46 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> But you've been told how to do it. So who's unsophisticated?

Heh heh ... I love you iOS apologists. I really do!

Your comment reminds me of what a naive N. Korean peasant might say after
believing the bombastic denials of the N. Korean diplomats as they strive
to distance themselves from their two disposable female lizard tails.

I know nospam doesn't believe a word he says - but you ... you probably
actually believe what you just wrote.

That's why I must smile, since I appreciate the humor.

You probably actually believe what you wrote (sans a shred of evidence that
supports your intuition and in stark contrast to factual evidence presented
to the contrary) ... all I can do is laugh and smile and thank God that I
have the grace to appreciate the humor of your displayed naivety.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 06:45:30 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:02:46 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:
>
>> But you've been told how to do it. So who's unsophisticated?
>
>Heh heh ... I love you iOS apologists. I really do!

<clip>

> in stark contrast to factual evidence presented
>to the contrary) ... all I can do is laugh and smile and thank God that I
>have the grace to appreciate the humor of your displayed naivety.

Neither an apology nor naivety. What factual evidence? From you?

Not!

Your Dunning-Krger shows well though.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:16:07 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> Neither an apology nor naivety. What factual evidence?

Heh heh ... What I love about people like you is that you actually exist
and you're not paid to disbelieve blatant facts and to believe what has
only been said but nobody can prove because it's flat out wrong.

Yet, you honestly believe it anyway.

When I read today about the N. Korean's responses trying to insiste the
death of Kim Jong-Nam's death was a "heart attack", I think to myself "do
they actually believe what they say?".

Since people like you exist, I have to conclude that, yes, the N. Koreans
actually believe what their government tells them.

At least nospam is smart enough to disavow what our government (e.g.,
Comey) says, because nospam is, contrary to what he says, actually
intelligent and able to comprehend detail.

Trying to figure you out, I've concluded that you and nospam say the same
ridiculously unproven things for two completely different reasons.

In the end, I'm glad you both exist because you help explain how the N.
Koreans can insist the two lizard tails and four N. Korean agents who
provided the likely two-part mucous-membrane penetrating poison are all
completely innocent.

In their minds the logic makes sense.

It takes a certain type of person to believe what they say, but the fact
that you exist, proves that such people abound.

Thank you for helping me understand.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:42:28 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

<bullshit clipped>
>
Your Dunning-Krger shows well.
>
KF

[Stijn De Jong]

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:15:26 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> Your Dunning-Krger shows well.

Heh heh ... I have to smile knowing that people like you actually exist.

You have absolutely no idea what the Dunning-Kruger scale entails.

Thank you by the way for the complement.
Even Stephen Hawkings is on the Dunning-Kruger scale.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:22:27 -0600, Lloyd Parsons wrote:

> Yeah, I do all those thing, plus much more. NONE of which is like the
> drivel you come up with in nearly every post.

Heh heh ... people like you actually exist just to make me smile.
You sure showed me what the iOS device can do.

It can do ... well ... um ... "text, talk, and watch ... plus much more".
Wow.

That's an impressive set of persuasive facts you have there.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

On Fri, 24 Feb 2017 02:51:21 +0000 (UTC), Stijn De Jong
<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:15:26 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:
>
>> Your Dunning-Krger shows well.
>
>Heh heh ... I have to smile knowing that people like you actually exist.
>
>You have absolutely no idea what the Dunning-Kruger scale entails.

It's two-fold.

1) Individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing
their ability as much higher than it really is.

2) Individuals may underestimate their relative competence and may
erroneously assume that tasks which are easy for them are also easy
for others.

>
>Thank you by the way for the complement

That comment places you on the first level. It wasn't a complement.

>Even Stephen Hawkings is on the Dunning-Kruger scale.

Everyone is somewhere on the scale. but you aren't close to Hawkins'
level.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 21:45:38 -0600, Bob...@Onramp.net wrote:

> It's two-fold.

Wow. You do have the capacity to learn.

> 1) Individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing
> their ability as much higher than it really is.
>
> 2) Individuals may underestimate their relative competence and may
> erroneously assume that tasks which are easy for them are also easy
> for others.

You also have the capacity to cut and paste verbatim out of Wikipedia.
Impressive skills.

>>Thank you by the way for the complement
>
> That comment places you on the first level. It wasn't a complement.

Heh heh ... I'm shocked. Shocked I say.

>>Even Stephen Hawkings is on the Dunning-Kruger scale.
>
> Everyone is somewhere on the scale. but you aren't close to Hawkins'
> level.

The good news is that you have shown a capacity to learn.
There is hope for humankind yet.

[Lloyd Parsons]

you can't persuade a troll.

[sms]

On 2/17/2017 6:12 PM, Stijn De Jong wrote:
> Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
> cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?

Obtaining the Cell ID might still be something that the carriers have
requested that Apple not permit. There are many rural areas with no
T-Mobile or Sprint towers, and in the case of T-Mobile, no roaming onto
AT&T. A T-Mobile phone will still connect to the AT&T tower, but other
than E-911 calls, there will be no service. Ditto for Virgin or Boost
connecting to a Verizon tower (Sprint native users can usually roam on
Verizon). It could upset the users of these second and third tier
carriers if they could figure out which tower, that they could not use,
they were connected to. They'd complain to the carrier and/or Apple,
even though it's not Apple's fault when roaming isn't allowed. Since
Android is not a closed system, the carriers probably couldn't do
anything about apps that provide the Cell ID.

This is just a theory, but I can't imagine what other reason there could be.

Disclaimer: I am speaking only for myself.

[nospam]

In article <o901mg$cgc$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> On 2/17/2017 6:12 PM, Stijn De Jong wrote:
> > Is there a reason (what is the reason) Apple iOS won't let users get the
> > cell tower ID that their phone is connected to?
>
> Obtaining the Cell ID might still be something that the carriers have
> requested that Apple not permit.

apple doesn't prohibit it and is rather easy to find out. it's also not
particularly useful.

> There are many rural areas with no
> T-Mobile or Sprint towers, and in the case of T-Mobile, no roaming onto
> AT&T. A T-Mobile phone will still connect to the AT&T tower, but other
> than E-911 calls, there will be no service. Ditto for Virgin or Boost
> connecting to a Verizon tower (Sprint native users can usually roam on
> Verizon). It could upset the users of these second and third tier
> carriers if they could figure out which tower, that they could not use,
> they were connected to. They'd complain to the carrier and/or Apple,
> even though it's not Apple's fault when roaming isn't allowed. Since
> Android is not a closed system, the carriers probably couldn't do
> anything about apps that provide the Cell ID.
>
> This is just a theory, but I can't imagine what other reason there could be.

it's complete rubbish.

cell carriers know quite well about the coverage of their competitors
and roaming agreements among them.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 18:07:44 -0800, sms wrote:

> Obtaining the Cell ID might still be something that the carriers have
> requested that Apple not permit. There are many rural areas with no
> T-Mobile or Sprint towers, and in the case of T-Mobile, no roaming onto
> AT&T. A T-Mobile phone will still connect to the AT&T tower, but other
> than E-911 calls, there will be no service. Ditto for Virgin or Boost
> connecting to a Verizon tower (Sprint native users can usually roam on
> Verizon). It could upset the users of these second and third tier
> carriers if they could figure out which tower, that they could not use,
> they were connected to. They'd complain to the carrier and/or Apple,
> even though it's not Apple's fault when roaming isn't allowed. Since
> Android is not a closed system, the carriers probably couldn't do
> anything about apps that provide the Cell ID.
>
> This is just a theory, but I can't imagine what other reason there could be.

I can't say that your hypothesis is right or wrong, but looking at the
bigger picture, I already posted numerous articles from app developers
which I quoted when I posted them that Apple just doesn't expose its API to
the developers.

I think the technical "why" is as simple as that.
There's less that a developer "can" do with iOS, not because the hardware,
but because of the restrictive iOS doesn't let them.

So you'll never get the unique cell id of a tower (e.g., of the local micro
tower so you can tell which one you're connected to) out of iOS for the
same reason that there is a list as long as my arm of the things that iOS
can't do (e.g., it can't do the simplest of things such as allow you to
order your desktop the way you want it to be).

The number of things that iOS can't do is astounding to anyone who knows
anything about phones, but the REASON iOS is so primitively restrictive is
what the question was about.

I think, in the end, the iOS users who posted that all they do is punch
buttons answered the question.

Why should Apple bother giving apps power when the users are that
unsophisticated that they don't need any power?

It's a fair business question that it's work on their part to give power to
the apps (and through the apps, to the users), which their users don't seem
to need.

If the user needed power, they wouldn't be on iOS in the first place.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 22:05:58 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Obtaining the Cell ID might still be something that the carriers have
>> requested that Apple not permit.
>
> apple doesn't prohibit it and is rather easy to find out. it's also not
> particularly useful.

Nospam always give a good laugh with his answers.

His answers are sort of like the North Korean embassy's response that the
Malaysians first said Kim Jong Nam died of a heart attack, so, while the
N.K. insists that's not his brother, not only do they want the body back,
but they insist that he died of a heart attack simply because a single
erroneous datapoint fits their ideological goal.

In the same sense nospam knows full well that it's impossible to get the
unique cell tower out of iOS (just try to tell which of the two microcells
to both sides of you that you're connected to, for just one example).

So what nospam says, just as the NK embassy attempts to distort a
datapoint, is that Apple Marketing doesn't "prohibit" an app from obtaining
the cell id.

Heh heh ... nospam knows it's *impossible* for an app to obtain the unique
tower cell id, so what he says is that Apple doesn't "prohibit" what is
actually impossible for iOS (yet easy for Android) to do.

a. It's impossible.
b. Apple doesn't "prohibit" it.
c. Apple simply doesn't expose the API to obtain it

The question is why does Apple make it impossible for an app to obtain the
unique cell tower id (e.g., of my own micro tower, for example).

The answer becomes mostly that Apple users, overall, are extremely
unsophisticated in that they do (by their own admission) almost nothing
other than punch buttons that the Marketing people gave them.

If there isn't a button for it, they can't do it.
If there isn't an exposed API for it, the App Developers can't do it
either.

Basically, iOS is limited in what it can do, but that doesn't stop Apple
from being one of the most successful companies on earth, so, there is
business merit in the decision to maintain such a vastly limited operating
system.

It doesn't amaze me that Apple limits their API exposure to apps.
What amazes me is that the users overall don't seem to mind being crippled.

--
iOS: Just give up.

[nospam]

In article <o91dji$1aps$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> The number of things that iOS can't do is astounding to anyone who knows
> anything about phones, but the REASON iOS is so primitively restrictive is
> what the question was about.

the number of things *you* can't do on ios is astounding, despite being
told how.

meanwhile, the rest of the world does what you claim can't be done and
a whole lot more, without any fuss whatsoever.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:34:08 -0500, Davoud wrote:

> Bingo. There is definitely a cripple here, a mental cripple. He would
> be appalled to know that, for the reasons you cited, we don't even
> guess; it works and that's the end of it

It works?

What's funny is that you actually believe that.

It's like a cripple with a peg leg saying "it works".

Sure iOS works; but it can't do so many of the simplest of things that
Android and the other operating systems can do that it's not funny.

Using iOS is like running a race with a wooden leg.

Sure. It works.

But just try to do something as simple as figure out which of the two
possible micro towers you're connected to, and all of a sudden, iOS users
are forced to "just give up".

--
iOS: The most primitive & limited mobile OS on the planet.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:49:24 -0500, nospam wrote:

> the number of things *you* can't do on ios is astounding, despite being
> told how.

Heh heh ... I love when you post because the way you write is EXACTLY like
what the North Korean embassy wrote, which was for some strange reason, we
don't believe that the North Koreans have biological weapons "despite being
told by NK" that they don't.

Just because you continually propagate a lie that *everyone* knows to be a
lie, you act just like the North Koreans do when they say they don't
possess nuclear weapons.

We've been "told many times" by NK that they only have peaceful intentions.
So why don't we believe it?

> meanwhile, the rest of the world does what you claim can't be done and
> a whole lot more, without any fuss whatsoever.

Heh heh ... you say I claim it can't be done, and yet - you know I posted
screenshots of my own microtower being reported in Android, yet, even you
know that it can't be done on iOS.

Not only have I posted actual articles by actual developers stating it
can't be done, and not only is there zero proof on this planet that you or
anyone else has ever gotten the unique tower id (e.g., of a micro tower
which was the original goal), you say what you say.

nospam: It can be done.
world: Not on iOS.
nospam: It can be done on iOS.
world: how?
nospam: I just make this stuff up.
world: we know

Why do you just make this stuff up?

There are only two possible reasons:
a. You know that iOS can't report the unique cell id - so you just lie.
b. You don't know that iOS can't report the unique cell id - so you make it
up.

There is nobody (but you apparently) on this planet who actually believes
that you can get the unique cell id out of iOS (e.g., if you are between
two micro towers, which one are you connected to?).

The question was never whether it's impossible.
That was clear to everyone from the start.

The question was always WHY is it impossible.

The answer seems to be that Apple is doing just fine selling an operating
system so restrictive that it can't even report the cell tower id that it's
connected to.

If you wanted power, you wouldn't be on iOS in the first place.

And that's really the correct answer.

--
iOS: It lacks power.

[nospam]

In article <o91f9h$1e7q$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> Heh heh ... you say I claim it can't be done, and yet - you know I posted
> screenshots of my own microtower being reported in Android, yet, even you
> know that it can't be done on iOS.

<https://ociotec.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/proveedor_telefonia.png>

[sms]

On 2/27/2017 6:47 AM, Stijn De Jong wrote:

> It doesn't amaze me that Apple limits their API exposure to apps.
> What amazes me is that the users overall don't seem to mind being crippled.

It's more information than most people want to know. If you asked 10,000
people if they cared about knowing the Cell ID of the cell they were
connected to, you might find 2 that cared. I would be one of them
because of IOT devices that I work with. For commercial and industrial
users of cellular technology in the IOT space, they need this
information, but they have other ways of obtaining it. We use all
Android and Linux devices for IOT, though many of the people I work with
have personal iPhones.

Of course you could claim that the 88%, and growing, market share of
Android versos iOS means that most users do care about this sort of
thing, and you'd be wrong. There are many reasons to choose one platform
over another. There are several very useful apps, available only on
Android, that far more people care about than finding their Cell ID.

But of course the big reason that Android's market share is so large is
that there are so many low-cost Android devices. I'd like to see a
market analysis of $400+ MSRP Android flagship devices versus $400+ MSRP
iOS flagship devices. That's where the manufacturers are making all
their money, not in those $129 LG Android phones sold at Walmart.

[nospam]

In article <o91j1h$rfk$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> But of course the big reason that Android's market share is so large is
> that there are so many low-cost Android devices.

many of them are little more than feature phones which happen to use
android.

also included in that market share are android devices that *aren't*
phones, such as refrigerators, ovens and many other devices, which skew
the numbers when compared to only iphones (or ios devices as a whole).

> I'd like to see a
> market analysis of $400+ MSRP Android flagship devices versus $400+ MSRP
> iOS flagship devices. That's where the manufacturers are making all
> their money, not in those $129 LG Android phones sold at Walmart.

there have been plenty, all showing apple in the lead.

if you include sectors where apple has no products (bottom tier phones,
refrigerators, etc.), then the numbers skew the other way.

not that it matters, since market share doesn't matter.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:12:35 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Heh heh ... you say I claim it can't be done, and yet - you know I posted
>> screenshots of my own microtower being reported in Android, yet, even you
>> know that it can't be done on iOS.
>
> <https://ociotec.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/proveedor_telefonia.png>

Heh heh ... you are always a jokester so I appreciate your humor.

Why didn't you supply the number "42" as your supposed universal proof?
http://i.cubeupload.com/YYVGGg.jpg

The number 42 is as believable as the number 388 for a unique micro tower
cell id.

While you are funny, it's impossible to understand why you write what you
write, just as it's impossible to understand why the North Korean Embassy
said that the allegation of VX gas was fabricated by authorities to make
things "more complicated" for North Korea.

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-north-korea-kim-assassination-20170223-story.html
"On Thursday, the North Korean state news agency KCNA denied that he was
?poisoned to death,? insisting that he died of a ?heart stroke.? Malaysian
police ?recklessly made [the poisoning] an established fact, only to make
matters complicated,? it said."

Just like they don't actually believe what they say, you don't actually
believe what you say. Yet you (and they) still stay it, which is the
humorous part.

I guess there are gullible people out there who think the number 388 (or
42) is a unique microtower cell ID (and not just some number pulled out of
an opencell database which anyone can change at any time and which doesn't
represent the towers we are talking about in the first place).

[nospam]

In article <o91s17$971$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

>
> >> Heh heh ... you say I claim it can't be done, and yet - you know I posted
> >> screenshots of my own microtower being reported in Android, yet, even you
> >> know that it can't be done on iOS.
> >
> > <https://ociotec.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/proveedor_telefonia.png>
>
> Heh heh ... you are always a jokester so I appreciate your humor.

don't laugh too hard because everyone is laughing *at* you and your
stupidity.

> Why didn't you supply the number "42" as your supposed universal proof?
> http://i.cubeupload.com/YYVGGg.jpg
>
> The number 42 is as believable as the number 388 for a unique micro tower
> cell id.

indeed it is, given that there are 504 lte ids.

<http://article.sapub.org/10.5923.j.ijnc.20130305.01.html>
There are 504 Physical layer Cell Identities (PCIs) in the LTE
system[8]. The PCIs are combined into 168 unique groups. Each group
contains 3 unique cell identities[9]. The combination is such that
each PCI is a member of only one PCI group[8, 9, 10]. The 168 cell
groups are distinguished by 168 different sequences. Each PCI in a
cell group has a unique P-SS making a total of 504 cell IDs[9, 11].

> I guess there are gullible people out there who think the number 388 (or
> 42) is a unique microtower cell ID (and not just some number pulled out of
> an opencell database which anyone can change at any time and which doesn't
> represent the towers we are talking about in the first place).

i guess there are those who actually understand the technology, which
clearly you do *not*.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:44:34 -0500, nospam wrote:

>> Heh heh ... you are always a jokester so I appreciate your humor.
>
> don't laugh too hard because everyone is laughing *at* you and your
> stupidity.

It's humorous how you try to wiggle and worm your way out of the fact that
it's impossible on iOS to get my microtower unique cell IDs and you know
this.
http://i.cubeupload.com/RJ3cs6.jpg

For example, how is iOS going to report the unique cell id of each of these
three micro towers, all three of which I have in my home?
http://i.cubeupload.com/sSOph0.jpg

What's that?
iOS can't do something even that simple?

How do you know if it's this device or that other device you're connecting
to?
http://i.cubeupload.com/NhwUFR.jpg

What's that?
You have no idea?
You have absolutely no way of knowing this simple information?

Wow.
iOS *is* limited and primitive.
iOS can't do the simplest of things.

> indeed it is, given that there are 504 lte ids.

You completely missed the boat since you're talking about getting cell id
from a database when using a data lookup, as you know all along, the whole
point is that the micro towers aren't going to be in any lookup database,
and, worse, the lookup can and is wrong as it's completely crowd sourced.

iOS: Garbage in; garbage out.

> i guess there are those who actually understand the technology, which
> clearly you do *not*.

Heh heh ... you say that, but you know that just by owning an Android
device alone, I can do more than you can ever do with an iOS device ...
simply because the iOS device is so primitive and limited in what it can
do.

For example, can you run a program to notify you exactly when you are
switching to a new cell tower not in your whitelist like I just did?
http://i.cubeupload.com/JUrONL.jpg

You can't?
Really?

You can't do something *that* simple on iOS?

I find it funny since you can't even do anything that I just did just
today, even though it's simple stuff such as graphing my WiFi signal
strength in time lines and current graph snapshots split up by the
frequency bands.
http://i.cubeupload.com/5QyGiz.jpg

Even something as simple as *that*, iOS can't do?
Really?

And what about telling you *exactly* which device in your house is the one
giving you fantastic signal strength of -53dBm cellular?.
http://i.cubeupload.com/HIz95n.jpg

You can't even do something *that* simple on iOS?

[nospam]

In article <o92vun$12q$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong

<stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:



> How do you know if it's this device or that other device you're connecting
> to?
> http://i.cubeupload.com/NhwUFR.jpg

one way is via an indication in the status bar. there are others.

<http://www.martycohenphotography.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/microce
ll-before-after.jpg>

> > indeed it is, given that there are 504 lte ids.
>
> You completely missed the boat since you're talking about getting cell id
> from a database when using a data lookup, as you know all along, the whole
> point is that the micro towers aren't going to be in any lookup database,
> and, worse, the lookup can and is wrong as it's completely crowd sourced.

it ain't me who missed the boat and you're once again trying to move
the goalposts.

the info is directly from the tower, *not* from a database.

you're also a blithering idiot.

> iOS: Garbage in; garbage out.

the only garbage is what you spew.

> > i guess there are those who actually understand the technology, which
> > clearly you do *not*.
>
> Heh heh ... you say that, but you know that just by owning an Android
> device alone, I can do more than you can ever do with an iOS device ...
> simply because the iOS device is so primitive and limited in what it can
> do.

no you definitely can't do half the shit i do with my devices nor as
easily, even when how to do it is explained to you.

> For example, can you run a program to notify you exactly when you are
> switching to a new cell tower not in your whitelist like I just did?
> http://i.cubeupload.com/JUrONL.jpg

that's the most important thing to do with a smartphone????

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-02-28, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:44:34 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>>> Heh heh ... you are always a jokester so I appreciate your humor.
>>
>> don't laugh too hard because everyone is laughing *at* you and your
>> stupidity.
>
> It's humorous

Watching you lie and flail around trying as hard as you can to troll is
humorous, because you constantly reveal just how ignorant you really are
about all things Apple.

> it's impossible on iOS to get my microtower unique cell IDs

Impossible? That's a flat-out lie. It's quite possible; and here's the
5-digit cell ID being displayed on an iphone 3G - way back in fucking
*2010*, SEVEN YEARS AGO:

<https://i.imgur.com/9v0uoQF.png>

Gee...how can this be?! You said it's "impossible"! It's almost as if
you are completely full of SHIT! Say it isn't so!! : )

> For example, how is iOS going to report the unique cell id of each of
> these three micro towers, all three of which I have in my home?

Using the "Signal" app, available on the Cydia app store, of course:

<http://www.redmondpie.com/signal-app-for-iphone-shows-detailed-info-of-cellular-towers-around-you/>

Now you'll exclaim, "Oh, but I don't want to jail break my device just
to run an app!", and "I don't want to download apps from anything other
than the Apple App Store!", like the huge WEASEL TROLL you are. Because
jail breaking and downloading stuff from other stores are concepts too
hard for your ignorant pathetic ass to fathom, even if lots of us do it
with *ease*! LOL! I've jail broken more iOS devices than I care to
count. But it's something way past your skill level, as you've admitted
right here in these news groups in the past. You're a fucking pathetic,
ignorant troll - and nothing more. We see right through you.

> What's that? iOS can't do something even that simple?

No, *you* can't do something this simple. For the rest of us, it's a non
issue. Not only do most of us not need it, but when we do, we know how
to get it done. Imagine that. An Apple-hating troll has trouble doing
things we do with EASE! : )

> Wow. iOS *is* limited and primitive. iOS can't do the simplest of
> things.

Nah, just you: the pathetic, Apple-hating, useless, ignorant troll.

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

JR

[Stijn De Jong]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:17:12 -0500, nospam wrote:

> the info is directly from the tower, *not* from a database.

I love your humor!

You continue to make me smile with your obvious subterfuge just as the N.
Koreans make me smile when they said "the women are innocent & should be
freed":
https://news.vice.com/story/how-assassins-likely-killed-kim-jong-uns-half-brother-with-a-weapon-of-mass-destruction

Like you, they pretend on the gullible when they say "how is it possible
that these female suspects could still be alive?", as if that's proof
they're innocent.

Likewise, you can pretend to the gullible you are unaware that Apple
removed all access to the cell tower ID in iOS 8.x and beyond, but the
thread shows you have been apprised of this fact multiple times.

Q: How can an iOS 8.x & above Appstore app report a unique tower ID?
A: It can't.

Q: Why not?
A: Same as always; Apple won't accept the app into the app store.

Many app developers have tried.
All failed.

Pretend you don't know about this Apple Developer Forum discussion:
https://forums.developer.apple.com/thread/21018
How can I get CellID, LAC and others device information?
Answer: You can't.

You've already been told numerous times about this developer thread:
How can I get lac,cellID and all of these device information?
https://forums.developer.apple.com/message/23789#23789

How can I get lac,cellID and all of these device information?
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/31335481/how-can-i-get-lac-cellid-and-all-of-these-device-information

Does iOS know the phone's location solely from cell tower, i.e. without GPS
data?
http://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/129640/does-ios-know-the-phones-location-solely-from-cell-tower-i-e-without-gps-data

In summary:
Q: How can an iOS 8.x & above Appstore app report a unique tower ID?
A: It can't.

Q: Why does nospam insist you can download such an app from the app store?
A: He is exactly as the N. Koreans are ... preying on the gullible.

[Stijn De Jong]

On 28 Feb 2017 05:19:15 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Impossible? That's a flat-out lie. It's quite possible; and here's the
> 5-digit cell ID being displayed on an iphone 3G - way back in fucking
> *2010*, SEVEN YEARS AGO:

Heh heh heh ... you are even funnier than nospam is.

You know why?

You don't even realize what nospam already knows, which is that the
hardware is certainly capable of obtaining the cell tower id but that Apple
themselves are the ones who removed access to the API long ago (in iOS 8.x
and above).

So, it's humorous that you are [still!] completely unaware that there is no
app in the app store that a user can download that Apple will allow to use
that private api (the question of why being the original question all
along).

So nospam and you are humerous in different ways:
a. Nospam knows the game of subterfuge and is preying on the gullible.
b. You? You're just gullible.

[Jolly Roger]

Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> wrote:

> On 28 Feb 2017 05:19:15 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Impossible? That's a flat-out lie. It's quite possible; and here's the
>> 5-digit cell ID being displayed on an iphone 3G - way back in fucking
>> *2010*, SEVEN YEARS AGO:
>
> Heh heh heh ...

Giggling like a little girl won't change the fact that you are a useless
no-good Apple-hating ignorant troll who can't do the simplest things that
we do with EASE. You come to this news group over and over trying your best
to make yourself look smarter than everyone else, yet you fall flat on your
face EVERY SINGLE TIME. You're a fucking PATHETIC JOKE. And the whole world
sees it.

> you are even funnier than nospam is.
>
> You know why?

Yeah, because I just showed what you claimed was "impossible" is easy to
do! LOL! You ignorant troll! : D

> b. You? You're just gullible.

Pure projection. You can't figure out how to do simple things in iOS and
claim they are "impossible", which makes you the gullible one here, weak
ass troll. : D

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-28 15:06:14 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:

> On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:17:12 -0500, nospam wrote:
>
>> the info is directly from the tower, *not* from a database.

<<Silliness Snip>>

>
> Likewise, you can pretend to the gullible you are unaware that Apple
> removed all access to the cell tower ID in iOS 8.x and beyond, but the
> thread shows you have been apprised of this fact multiple times.
>
> Q: How can an iOS 8.x & above Appstore app report a unique tower ID?
> A: It can't.
>
> Q: Why not?
> A: Same as always; Apple won't accept the app into the app store.
>
> Many app developers have tried.
> All failed.

<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2051%2059.png>
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2051%2033.png>
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2050%2057.png>


--


Regards,

Savageduck

[Jolly Roger]

That looks familiar. Which app is that again?

[sms]

On 2/28/2017 7:12 AM, Stijn De Jong wrote:

> You don't even realize what nospam already knows, which is that the
> hardware is certainly capable of obtaining the cell tower id but that Apple
> themselves are the ones who removed access to the API long ago (in iOS 8.x
> and above).
>
> So, it's humorous that you are [still!] completely unaware that there is no
> app in the app store that a user can download that Apple will allow to use
> that private api (the question of why being the original question all
> along).

Likely that they both are well aware of this. There must have been some
marketing reason why this capability was removed. Either carriers or
governments didn't want users to have this capability.

[Stijn De Jong]

On 28 Feb 2017 15:33:02 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

> Giggling like a little girl won't change the fact that you are a useless
> no-good Apple-hating ignorant troll who can't do the simplest things that
> we do with EASE.

You always make me smile but the smiles are different for you and nospam
and savageduck.

1. nospam: He knows that Apple doesn't allow access to the API.
2. jollyroger: You state the obvious which is that the hardware can do it.
3. savageduck: He doesn't understand we're talking about the real world.

I can excuse Savageduck because he doesn't seem to understand that the
problem set is and always was to report on the cellphone using app-store
apps the unique cell tower id of devices in my possession such as these:
http://i.cubeupload.com/RJ3cs6.jpg

I can even excuse nospam, because he actually knows that Apple disallowed
this capability years ago but he'll never admit it (so that's why I compare
him to the N. Korean diplomats). He's smart. But preying on the gullible.

You? Your situation is far worse in that you don't even seem to realize
that Apple doesn't allow such apps in the app store anymore.

In fact, all three of you completely prove the point in all your posts,
which is funny because none of you seem realize 3 simple facts:

A. The hardware certainly accesses the unique cell tower ID
B. Apple used to allow apps to report that unique cell tower ID
C. Apple no longer allows apps to report that information

Those 3 facts were never in contention.
The only question in this thread is "Why?".

Hint: Look at the subject line.

[Stijn De Jong]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 07:35:19 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

>> Many app developers have tried.
>> All failed.
>
> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2051%2059.png>
> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2051%2033.png>
> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2050%2057.png>

Savageduck,

I'm going to be super polite with you, because you seem to think that those
three screenshots show something (anything) relevant whatsoever to the
discussion as stated in the subject line of this thread.

You're kind of funny, but in a nice and yet different way from the others.
You don't even realize those three screenshots merely prove my point.

Look again at the micro & femto towers which clearly sparked this thread:
http://i.cubeupload.com/sSOph0.jpg

Take the femto tower on the right.
It has a unique cell id.

This thread is about why Apple doesn't allow an app in the app store today
that will report that unique cell id.

While everyone agrees that the hardware is absolutely capable of obtaining
that cell id (in fact, the hardware knows the cell id perfectly well), this
thread isn't about the hardware.

This thread is about WHY Apple won't let App developers access the API that
will allow a user today on iOS 8.x, 9.x, and 10.x (and beyond) to download
an app from the App Store and get that tower information.

All three of you are funny in that you don't even realize your own
arguments belie the truth.

1. nospam falls back on ancient software which Apple doesn't allow anymore,
which is, after all, the entire point of the thread (to ask why).

2. Jolly Roger is even more hilarious, since he doesn't realize that
Cydia-based apps have nothing to do with the question of why Apple doesn't
allow apps in the app store.

3. And your argument quixotic, really, because you seem to actually believe
that three screenshots of an Internet database lookup (which we all know
about) has anything whatsoever to do with the question of why Apple doesn't
allow the unique cell id to be reported.

All three of you are quite funny, but in different ways, since you either
don't understand what we're talking about or you do understand, and you
just don't like the facts.

A. There never was a question that the *hardware* obtains the unique cell
id of the micro and femto towers.
B. There never was a question that Apple-approved apps, in the past, used
to be able to report the micro & femto tower unique id.
C. There never was a question that a non-Apple-approved app can do it.

The only question always was and is why Apple disallows current apps from
reporting that information to the user.

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-28 15:43:43 +0000, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> said:

> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>> On 2017-02-28 15:06:14 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:
>>
>>>
>>> Many app developers have tried.
>>> All failed.
>>
>> <https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2051%2059.png>
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2051%2033.png>
<https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/File%20Feb%2027%2C%2021%2050%2057.png>

That
>>
> looks familiar. Which app is that again?

It is actually two apps, one free and one which wouldn't work for the
nymshifter because he would have to pay for it.
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cell-phone-coverage-map/id399701910?mt=8>
<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cellular-signal-booster-4g-network-tower-locator/id447158532?mt=8>
--


Regards,

Savageduck

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-28 16:40:39 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijnd...@nlnet.nl> said:

> On 28 Feb 2017 15:33:02 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:
>
>> Giggling like a little girl won't change the fact that you are a useless
>> no-good Apple-hating ignorant troll who can't do the simplest things that
>> we do with EASE.
>
> You always make me smile but the smiles are different for you and nospam
> and savageduck.
>
> 1. nospam: He knows that Apple doesn't allow access to the API.
> 2. jollyroger: You state the obvious which is that the hardware can do it.
> 3. savageduck: He doesn't understand we're talking about the real world.
>
> I can excuse Savageduck because he doesn't seem to understand that the
> problem set is and always was to report on the cellphone using app-store
> apps the unique cell tower id of devices in my possession such as these:
> http://i.cubeupload.com/RJ3cs6.jpg

Well thank you for excusing me because of my inability to report on
ID's of devices in your basement. I have no plans to drive up to Santa
Clara County anytime soon.
Where your ADD fails you, is in your ability to comprehend that the
vast majority of iOS & Android mobile device users care in anyway about
the arcane minutia you are obsessed with.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Jolly Roger]

Muchas gracias. : )

[Stijn De Jong]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:43:37 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

> It is actually two apps, one free and one which wouldn't work for the
> nymshifter because he would have to pay for it.
> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cell-phone-coverage-map/id399701910?mt=8>
> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cellular-signal-booster-4g-network-tower-locator/id447158532?mt=8>

What is kind of sad is that you appear to be a typical iOS user who thinks
that simply by paying more money, you get the desired feature even though
it's impossible for app developers to provide that feature (since Apple
won't let them).

HINT: See the subject line.

What's kind of scary is not that you're apparently blissfully unaware of
the facts.

What I find disturbing is that your thought process, if it's typical of iOS
users in general, is sadly, scary.

AppDeveloper: Sorry, Apple won't allow it.
Savageduck: But I'll *pay* for it!
AppDeveloper: OK. I'll take your money. But Apple still won't allow it.
Savageduck: Great. Now I feel better. I paid for nothing.
AppDeveloper: OK. But I repeat, Apple won't let me access what you want.
Savageduck: That's OK. Not only did I pay for nothing, but I openly
disparage people who don't pay to get nothing in return.