What freeware graphical Wi-Fi debugging tools do you use on Android & iOS to graph signal strength for available APs over time?

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

What freeware graphical Wi-Fi debugging tools do you use on Android & iOS
to graph signal strength for available APs over time?

Where my phone just now generated this editable text listing of apps I've
used to debug & graph WiFi signal strength of all available APs, over time:
o FRITZ!App Fon, de.avm.android.fritzapp
o FRITZ!App WLAN, de.avm.android.wlanapp
o FRITZ!App WLAN Basic, de.avm.android.wlanapp.basic
o Network Analyzer, net.techet.netanalyzerlite.an
o Network Signal Info, de.android.telnet
o Signal Strength, com.cls.networkwidget
o Wifi Analyser, com.keuwl.wifi <== this one is nice
o Wifi Analyzer, com.farproc.wifi.analyzer
o WiFi Analyzer, abdelrahman.wifianalyzerpro
o Wifi Analyzer, com.farproc.wifi.analyzer.classic
o WiFi Analyzer, uk.co.soapysoft.wifianalyzer
o WiFi Analyzer, com.wifianalyzer.networktools.networkanalyzer
o WiFi Signal Strength, com.northbridge.wifisignalstrength

Personally, I happen to like "kuewl", whose screenshots are below...
<https://i.postimg.cc/TYtzDX51/wifiprivacy05.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/bYTM7jTg/wifiprivacy06.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/hjnyYCQN/wifiprivacy07.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/g0V43vts/wifiprivacy08.jpg>
<https://i.postimg.cc/cHTmbdS8/wifiprivacy09.jpg>
etc.

I would like to populate my iOS iPads with similar freeware from the Apple
App Store, so that I can make use of the much larger screen size.

For Android & for iOS, which free app on the app stores do you use...
o For displaying graphically all nearby Wi-Fi AP signal strength over time?

--
As a related aside, this works ok for cellular debugging:
o Cellular-Z, make.more.r2d2.cellular_z

In addition, for networking, the phone has these freeware apps:
o Fing, com.overlook.android.fing
o IP Tools, com.ddm.iptools

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 15:42:03 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

> For Android & for iOS, which free app on the app stores do you use...
> o For displaying graphically all nearby Wi-Fi AP signal strength over time?

UPDATE:

As many know, it's rather sad that iOS devices are mostly expensive stylish
toys that are, in actual use in the real world, far too primitive in design
to actually be useful when actual real-world debugging needs to be done.

As proof of that statement, below is a real world example where iOS users
have to "just give up", yet, Android users can actually setup, analyze, and
debug modern functionality with respect to WiFi debugging.

While the iOS apologists consistently and repetitively claim wholly
imaginary functionality that always fails the simplest of test of imaginary
belief systems (i.e., the "name just one" test), Android users easily pass
the "name just one" test when it comes to naming modern app functionality.
<https://i.postimg.cc/BZrZpDyp/debug-apps.jpg>

For example, I just snapped these screenshots of one app in use today:
<https://i.postimg.cc/FRqR6DSq/android-wifi-analyzer.jpg>
where apps with this powerfully useful functionality don't exist on ioS.

That's too bad because my iPad has a much larger screen than my phone.
<<https://i.postimg.cc/0NYJn7mF/nanobridge-nanobeam.jpg>>

One reason I use these tools is that I set up access points all the time
where it would be nice on the larger iPad screen if these tools existed.
<https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>

And, I set up temporary bridges from Ethernet to WiFi all the time:
<https://i.postimg.cc/vT0Krpfc/laptop-nanobeam-horn.jpg>

Which instantly extends the range of a laptop to the legal WiFi limits:
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs0NWSKr/laptopnanobeam.jpg>

Where it's your choice whether to use the horn alone or in combination with
the antenna, which turns the omni horn into a narrow beam WiFi extender:
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg>

Which, depending on lots of factors, could be many miles of extended range:
<https://i.postimg.cc/QMNv5FBC/typical-range-ptp.jpg>

Modern WiFi debugging apps are useful when you set up APs at home, where,
for example, you can instantly convert a dumb switch to a WiFi AP at home:
<https://i.postimg.cc/JhyCRT69/horn-to-switch.jpg>

Or, if you have a spare old router, instantly vastly extend it's range:
<https://i.postimg.cc/25NdBZ7f/horn-to-router.jpg>
Given that laptops are notoriously anemic when it comes to WiFi range.

You can even instantly bridge a desktop without WiFi to WiFi
<https://i.postimg.cc/6QJqK6Cj/desktop02.jpg>

Just as you can vastly extend WiFi range if the desktop already has it:
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>

There are UNIX-like tools inherent in the router software:
<https://i.postimg.cc/yx4CgWYt/mikrotik-router-config.jpg>

But they only work for an individual transceiver (radio & router):
<https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg>

And, they're different for each transceiver (radio & router):
<https://i.postimg.cc/Bv0wZbDh/pbe-m2-400-802-11-wifi-setting.jpg>

Where, unfortunately, NONE OF THIS MODERN APP FUNCTIONALITY exists on iOS!
<https://i.postimg.cc/25v3FT6S/debug-on-android.jpg>

However, in the hopes that I'm wrong about the fact iOS is just a toy, I
ask the iOS users to simply tell us what app we can download today off the
Apple App Store that will help us debug WiFi like these modern apps do,
where I'd LOVE to have this modern app functionality to turn my iPad from
being an expensive toy, to being something that actually has modern app
functionality that is useful to me.

--
Using mobile devices to their fullest functional capabilities every day!

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 26 Oct 2019 15:41:08 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>>Decided to send this before PG&E shuts off the power, which is scheduled to
>>go off for a few days in an hour or so (as far as PG&E has explained it).
>>(California has 3rd-world power reliability at the top of 1st-world costs!)
>
> I just spend the morning charging every rechargeable battery that I
> could find in my house and car. I had no idea I had that many
> batteries and chargers. Where did they call come from?

Hi Jeff,

I know what you mean about getting ready for the PG&E outage today!

Up here, we all have generators, because our power goes off on average once
a month for a day or two each time (I could email you the PG&E-supplied
accurate spreadsheet of just the last 30 sustained power outages, for
example, which I provided to the CPUC to show how PG&E provides unreliable
power at top-tier prices).

Unfortunately, the Santa Cruz Costco is out of those great gas cans!
<https://i.postimg.cc/26qmJCpz/costco-gas-cans.jpg>

Luckily, at Costco in Santa Cruz by 17 & 1, the batteries are currently on
sale as are the flashlights (and BR30 LED bulbs for a dollar a bulb:
<https://i.postimg.cc/T1d8xxFL/costco-br30-led-sales-price.jpg?

When those 750 lumens 15K life hours BR30 ceiling bulbs are $2.50 each
<https://i.postimg.cc/KjRNBsgp/costco-br30-led-normal-price.jpg>

Where I always have to get the 2,700 degrees for the wife, and the 5,000
degree BR30 bulbs for me.
<https://i.postimg.cc/WzCdK5Yy/costco-br30-side-by-side.jpg>

But where I then can't mix & match in the house, since they're different:
<https://i.postimg.cc/1XGzCy68/costco-br30-color-at-night.jpg>

Cost of LED Bulbs = $11.94 (plus CA sales tax of $8.32)
which, of course, is imputed on the original price, but which accounts for
a whoppingly huge 70% of the actual sales price at the register)
<https://i.postimg.cc/kMcwZKcg/costco-led-bulb-receipt.jpg>

BTW, I measured the $6 3-pound cooked chicken since I was stocking up
<https://i.postimg.cc/k5JpkFHJ/costco-chicken-at-the-start.jpg>
where I separated the hot gristle and weighted it separately:
<https://i.postimg.cc/LsG8yXyV/costco-chicken-gristle-separated.jpg>
From the hot meat with no bones and none of the sugar/salt solution:
<https://i.postimg.cc/wBR6sz6R/costco-chicken-meat-separated.jpg>
Where the gristle was about 1-3/4 pounds of the advertised 3 pounds
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1FR57xQ/costco-chicken-gristle-weight.jpg>
And the meat turned out to be just under 3 pounds of the 3 pound weight
<https://i.postimg.cc/JnKdry9N/costco-chicken-meat-weight.jpg>

>>Given this thread is a public potluck of useful sharing, what I would love
>>is if Jeff and/or Johann could help shed a summary of light on the various
>>"options" that are available to mere homeowners, who have Ubiquiti radios.
>
> Pass. I'm not a salesman and really don't care what users do with
> their computers and equipment. I'm just the guy that makes them work,
> or explains to them how they work so they can make them work without
> my involvement.

Fair enough.

I like to explain things, to people who care to learn, and I love even more
being able to do stuff that people don't normally do (such as what these
radios allow for).

I admit I'm terrible at dealing with the trolls though, as it's
inconceivable to me that these people have zero purposefully helpful intent
in everything they do.

> I also avoid recommending anything that I haven't
> personally broken, errr... tested, because of the large number of
> surprises I find, and lies in the data sheets.

Yup. I understand. I still remember you wrote the best description on all
of Usenet for the lies that router sales pitches spew, particularly about
the "power" figures, where that's where I learned only the FCC knows for
sure. :)

> That means I don't
> know anything about the various "options" available to those who don't
> know what they want. See a salesman or system integrator for details
> on those.
>
> Unfortunately, I've played with everything you've mentioned, so you'll
> get the benefits of my wisdom and sarcasm.

Understood. And accepted.

There are so many options to these radios that I don't even know all the
things they can do for us, where I mostly use them for three things:
1. Point to multipoint (instantly adding an access point to "an RJ45")
2. Point to multipoint (instantly bridging Ethernet to WiFi networks)
3. Point to point (for longer LOS hauls, where mine is 6 miles only)

But there's a LOT more we can do with these radios (e.g., they're routers
too, and they are repeaters also, etc.).

>>For example, we haven't covered the free mobile device available debuggers:
>><https://i.postimg.cc/FRqR6DSq/android-wifi-analyzer.jpg>
>
> Kinda looks like a variation on the original (and still best) Wi-Fi
> Analyzer Android app:
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.farproc.wifi.analyzer&hl=en_US>

Yup. You and I went over these apps in gory detail a few years ago.

Where I'm glad you care about your credibility, as I do, and where you
listed the unique name for the WiFi Analyzer app you like, as I have, oh,
let me check, give me a second ... ok... I have 6 apps alone named exactly
that (i.e., "WiFi Analyzer") on my Android phone at this very minute:
<https://i.postimg.cc/ZqH1RDNv/debug-wifi-on-android.jpg>
o Wifi Analyser <com.keuwl.wifi>
o Wifi Analyzer <com.farproc.wifi.analyzer>
o Wifi Analyzer <com.farproc.wifi.analyzer.classic>
o WiFi Analyzer <abdelrahman.wifianalyzerpro>
o WiFi Analyzer <uk.co.soapysoft.wifianalyzer>
o WiFi Analyzer <com.wifianalyzer.networktools.networkanalyzer>

And yet, on iOS, there are zero. Sigh. The iPhone users don't even realize
how utterly primitive the app choices are on their beloved platform.
I test software like you test hardware, so I know them all.

I just wish my iOS iPads could have this kind of modern functionality.
Sigh.

(What's odd is that the Apple Apologists incessantly claim the
functionality exists, and they even did a Youtube video condemning me
because I proved they simply fabricated imaginary iOS functionality, as
they always seem to do - which is really odd for adults to try to pull).
o It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/rX-L9xbYAQAJ>

Here's the video Snit did about me, where it's hilarious that none of the
Apple Apologists ever even _once_ looked at the Y axis!
<https://youtu.be/7QaABa6DFIo>

>>Where, as far as I know, there's nothing like these tools on iOS (sadly):
>><https://i.postimg.cc/25v3FT6S/debug-on-android.jpg>
>>(I wish such modern app functionality existed on iOS, so if anyone out
>>there knows iOS better than I do, please let me know where to get it).
>
> In the words of the late great Steve Jobs, "You don't need to know".

You are correct that the Apple philosophy is to limit what you can do,
but what's strange about the many Apple Apologists is that they fabricate
imaginary iOS functionality all the time....

Why?
I don't know why.

But they do it all the time.
o What are common well-verified psychological traits of Apple Apologists
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM/veU8FwAjBQAJ>

They don't care that their credibility is shit the moment they do that.
o Meanwhile, I've never once posted something that wasn't a fact (AFAIK).

I care about my credibility - which is why the very fact that there are so
many trolls who infest this thread who don't give a whit about their lack
of credibility astounds me - since adults are supposed to provide value.

Sigh.

>>Even on the router software itself, we covered some things that are of
>>general interest to users, but, for example, we didn't mention AirSelect:
>><https://i.postimg.cc/kg5LKkz9/pbe-m2-400-airmax-setting.jpg>
>
> What is Air Select?
> <https://community.ui.com/questions/What-is-Air-Select/ab1949f3-8f39-42ac-8821-df5dcb2283a1>
> It's a variation on having the wireless access point change channel in
> a futile effort to find one that is empty.

hehhehheh...

> The client radios will all
> follow the channel change without dropping the connection. Other
> manufacturers WAP's and routers have the same feature. I always leave
> it disabled because there are a small number of weird client radios
> that fail to follow the channel change, and end up associated with a
> totally different WAP or router on a different SSID. Leaving it off
> has almost totally eliminated the "can't connect" phone calls.

Now that's interesting.

If you were an Apple Apologist, I would have to flip a coin to see if I
believed you, but since I know you, for many years, to be credible (as am
I), I believe you a priori.

Thanks for that advice where I will take it to heart since you have always
been credible, if a bit self effacing (I love the photo of you in your park
ranger outfit by the way ... it was so 70s ... but it makes you human on
Usenet!). :)

>>And, we didn't dig into details of the versatile use of wireless options:
>>o Station
>>o Access Point
>>o AP-Repeater
>><https://i.postimg.cc/htQ469sQ/pbe-m2-400-ap-station.jpg>
>
> Station means "client bridge".
> Access point means "wireless access point", "multipoint wireless
> bridge", "wireless router with the WAN port disconnected", or some
> other conglomeration of impressive sounding buzzwords.
> AP repeater means "interference and congestion generator with the
> added bonus of cutting maximum throughput in half".

Hehhehheh... I didn't quite get all the technical jargon, but I did get the
jokes as the repeater does double duty, hence half the throughput.

I've never put the Ubiquiti radios on anything but bridge or access point,
so it's good information to know, where I love that these tools, like an
Android phone, turn out to be so versatile that they do far more than we
know at first.

>>Nor did we distinguish between the various network options, for example:
>>o Bridge
>>o Router
>>o SOHO Router
>><https://i.postimg.cc/gcBWpxnV/pbe-m2-400-bridge-router.jpg>
>
> Bridging is what ALL wi-fi devices do. It means they work on Layer 2

Thanks for that summary which makes total sense.

> of the TCP/IP stack and use MAC addresses to switch packets to the
> correct destination.
> Router is Layer 3 of the TCP/IP stack. It adds IP addresses.

I've never used this, but it seems useful if we plug it into a switch where
we can have multiple devices on that switch, where, I guess, each gets its
own IP address from the Ubiquiti router.

Is that about right for the router (given it's only one RJ45 port coming
out of the radio)?

> SOHO Router means "Small Office, Home Office router". That's a
> commodity router with all the features and functions needed to provide
> business class performance and reliability removed to keep the price
> low.

What I'm guessing is that the "router" versus "soho router" option must be
giving the Ubiquiti radio "more options" that are related to routing.

As I said, I have never used that "soho router" option in the Ubiquiti
AirOS software, so I don't even know if I've ever needed to use it as a
"Soho router" and didn't know it.

>>Personally, I don't know them well enough to summarize each option above,
>>but maybe the experts here can write a quick one-line summary for each so
>>that everyone benefits in this purposefully helpful Usenet sharing potluck.
>
> I only share with those who can pass a credit check.

Thanks for that advice, where you've helped me and many others cheerfully
over the years, where I still remember when I was trying to change MAC
addresses and IMEI numbers (many years ago when it mattered), and you
advised against it (and you explained that the one MAC address you can
change isn't the one you want to change, etc.).

My point is that your advice, over the years, has always been credible.
As am I.

Thanks - and - well - we were 'scheduled' for that PG&E outage, but we
didn't get it yet, so I had better send this off to you now before it
happens.

--
Usenet is a pairing of the most helpful minds to benefit everyone who can.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

While this post just now to Mike Easter isn't about WiFi graphing tools,
this post does show users how to VASTLY increase the range at which their
Android and iOS devices can connect to your router, where, the problem with
huge distances in such things is the limitations of the utterly crappy
transmit power of the mobile device.

If you read the note below carefully, you'll see the simple mechanical
solution to solve that fact that you can easily get signal to the puny
mobile device, but the puny mobile device has to get signal back.

On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 16:41:44 -0700, Mike Easter wrote:

>> Why do they omit those critical Wi-Fi specs?
>> o I don't know why
>
> For me, it is better for me to keep my router and my access point
> 'separate'.

Hi Mike Easter,

You're not a troll so it won't irk anyone for me to respond in detail to
you, where I don't disagree that almost all (many?) tools are best bought
separately for best performance and functionality (IMHO), I agree.

For example, you can purchase the fastest router (or switch) you can find
at whatever price is your price point, and then add the best access point
you can find at the best price point.

This has a HUGE advantage that the access point is connected by cat5, so it
can be located, oh, I don't know, hundreds of feet away, can't it?
<https://i.postimg.cc/25NdBZ7f/horn-to-router.jpg>

That gives you optimal placement of both the router & the access point.
o Plus, you can buy the most powerful access point allowed by law.

As you know from this recent thread, the AP will almost certainly be able
to shoot at the legal limit, which means it's as powerful as you can get
it, and all you have to do is plug it into the back of the fastest router
(or switch) you can find, and voila!

Instant (a) fastest router plus instant (b) most powerful access point,
each of which is (c) placed at the optimum location for your specific
needs.

What could be a more perfect situation?

o Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your desktop
computer
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.internet.wireless/Dpk9EhVreJk/fx5dZ3XlDAAJ>

> I generally am shopping price primarily, and I look at the specs
> 'secondarily' so that I don't buy something which is 'cheap'
> (economical) and inferior. I would rather have economical and sufficient.

What you wrote makes general sense, Mike, but I have a logical
philosophical practical "issue" with that common sense approach.

As you know from the prior thread on WiFi range, the price of consumer
stuff is about the same as the price for the pro stuff (ever since Ubiquiti
got into the business anyway), where for $100 you can buy an anemic home
access point or for $100 you can buy the most powerful home access point
that the law allows.

The price doesn't seem to matter (all that much).
o And availability isn't an issue either (as Amazon carries it all)

What's needed is the knowledge.
o For example, the knowledge of the transmit power of your device.

At least when you buy the $100 pro stuff, you get clear, open, and obvious
Tx & Rx power specifications, extremely clearly noted, down to the plus or
minus in the measurements and down to the differences at each frequency
range.

You don't get ANY of those specifications (AFAIK) in the anemic home stuff,
which, kind of, sort of, is my main point.

The home stuff, IMHO, Tx & Rx power is utter crap (in most cases) compared
to the pro stuff, and yet, it costs about the same.

My point is that buying by separate components seems to make a lot of
sense, as does buying by the spec, but not by price since price doesn't
seem to track performance.

> My cable service is 200 Mbs as opposed to gigabit. It is best for me to
> have a gigabit router, but its wifi capabilities aren't very important
> because its 'physical' location for wifi distribution for my needs is
> terrible.

Wow.

Your situation is probably common, where your speeds are 10 times what mine
are since my Internet comes over the air, but what you just explained,
seems to me, to be a perfect candidate for something like this setup:
<https://i.postimg.cc/JhyCRT69/horn-to-switch.jpg>

1. You buy the FASTEST router (or dumb switch) you can afford
2. You tack on any access point that can Tx at the legal limits
3. You place that access point anywhere you want (hundreds of feet away)

> Generally one can't get a 'good deal' on a router w/o wifi
> these days because they ALL have wifi of various capabilities.

Yes. But.

The Ubiquiti devices can be easily set up to be routers:
<https://i.postimg.cc/gcBWpxnV/pbe-m2-400-bridge-router.jpg>

I'm not suggesting you do this, but I'm just saying you "can".
o You get the best of three worlds in terms of speed & power & placement
o At about the same price you pay now for consumer crap

I'm not suggesting you do this simply because we'd have to think it through
more thoroughly; but I am constantly reminding people that the consumer
stuff they pay for is crap in terms of its WiFi Tx power.

I suspect (but don't know this for a fact) that the REASON they don't tell
you the Tx specs on the box is that they KNOW it's crap.

Consumer stuff is probably crap in terms of Rx power too (but I haven't
checked that).

> So, I also need a separate access point that I can connect by gigabit
> ethernet to locate the AP in a much much better place w/in easy ethernet
> connectivity to the router (or a gigabit switch which is located not
> very far from the router to give me more ethernet ports, as on-sale
> routers don't usually have enough ethernet ports for my needs, but one
> economical router and one economical switch and one access point fills
> the bill best and still costs less than $100 on sale.

Methinks you should, at least theoretically, consider three things:
1. The fastest router (or just a dumb switch) you like
2. Any access point that transmits to the legal limit
3. Placed within a few hundred feet of the router/switch (by cat5)

At least theoretically, doesn't that give you the best of 3 worlds?

Even though it's work, you're worth it, so I just snapped this picture for
you, which shows that I'm doing exactly that, where my router is nowhere
near my switch and where the access points are nowhere near the switch.
<https://i.postimg.cc/YSfBmPkf/dumb-switch-plus-access-point.jpg>

Note that you do NOT need such a huge access point, and also note that I
brought that access point from where it was, to this location, to put it in
the picture along with the switch, but rest assured, that access point is
working perfectly and tied to the switch you see in that picture.

Obviously with such a huge antenna dish, that access point has stellar
reception of even the weakest mobile devices (usually the anemic iOS
devices), which is why it's being used inside the house.

You don't need anything near that, and, in fact, you can easily get to the
legal limit on transmit power with just the small horn of these devices:
<https://i.postimg.cc/D0vfqM3p/horns.jpg>

> It is easy to find an economical gigabit ethernet wifi AP w/ 300 Mbps
> wifi for less than $25 and free shipping. The spec sheet provides EIRP
> values which don't mean much to me.

I'd LOVE to see those spec sheets for the EIRP of those $25 routers!
o I'm expecting something really crappy, like less than 20 decibels.

Notice that, at least theoretically, you seem to be a perfect candidate for
the concept of breaking down the tools into the best at what they do.

Instead of the swiss army knife approach of most routers, you could
a. Get the fasted switch (or router) you like
b. Connect by cat5 an access point at up to the legal power limit
c. Place that access point anywhere you like (hundreds of feet away)

As noted, I do exactly that all the time, only my switches are all spare
switches that I have lying around, as are my access points.

> In my system I don't need great range, just enough to give excellent
> bandwidth throughout a large house and yard and minor obstacles in a
> residential neighborhood full of other wifi, cell phones, and my own
> several cordless landline type phones.

Range is a function of transmit power, antenna gain, & receiver
sensitivity, and bandwidth is a function of range and processing power, all
of which can be optimized using the approach you suggest.

Basically we're (theoretically) contrasting these two approaches:
a. Swiss Army Knife approach (which the typical consumer uses)
b. Optimized tools approach (which is in my photo I snapped for you).

What I don't know is whether the router that comes with the Ubiquiti
devices is "sufficient" for home use, but, hell, pros use it, so, I would
"think" it would be.

But I never set my Ubiquiti devices up as a router, per se
<https://i.postimg.cc/gcBWpxnV/pbe-m2-400-bridge-router.jpg>

I just set them up as a WiFi access point (or WiFi bridge to Ethernet):
<https://i.postimg.cc/htQ469sQ/pbe-m2-400-ap-station.jpg>

So I don't know how good or bad they are as a SOHO router.

--
As a courtesy to purposefully helpful people sharing value, I will not
respond to common trolls (who impart nothing of value in their trolls).

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 03:52:13 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

> For example, you can purchase the fastest router (or switch) you can find
> at whatever price is your price point, and then add the best access point
> you can find at the best price point.

UPDATE:

Here is what I just purchased, by way of example for cellular & WiFi:
o <https://i.postimg.cc/7L910XNy/wifi05.jpg>

Given this was my WiFi & cellular test situation at various locations:
o abdelrahman.wifianalyzerpro <https://i.postimg.cc/NMbNGBnm/wifi01.jpg>
o uk.co.soapysoft.wifianalyzer <https://i.postimg.cc/281Hmp7L/wifi02.jpg>
o com.keuwl.wifi <https://i.postimg.cc/Ls3Dvm2w/wifi03.jpg>
o make.more.r2d2.cellular_z <https://i.postimg.cc/tJwN7TNZ/wifi04.jpg>

If anyone knows of similar existing app freeware on iOS, let us know.

--
In general, the only ones who don't realize iOS is a toy operating system,
are those who simply push buttons that Apple Marketing fed them to push.

[Jenny Telia]

On 04/11/2019 06:28, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 03:52:13 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
>

<snip>

Interesting monologue. Are you feeling lonely, Holder?

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:20:08 +0100, Jenny Telia wrote:

> Interesting monologue. Are you feeling lonely, Holder?

Hi Jenny Telia,

Thank you for pointing out iOS utterly lacks this basic app functionality.
<https://i.postimg.cc/NMbNGBnm/wifi01.jpg>

Luckily, Android users can benefit from a plethora good free modern apps.

o FRITZ!App Fon, de.avm.android.fritzapp
o FRITZ!App WLAN, de.avm.android.wlanapp
o FRITZ!App WLAN Basic, de.avm.android.wlanapp.basic
o Network Analyzer, net.techet.netanalyzerlite.an
o Network Signal Info, de.android.telnet
o Signal Strength, com.cls.networkwidget
o Wifi Analyser, com.keuwl.wifi <== this one is nice
o Wifi Analyzer, com.farproc.wifi.analyzer

o WiFi Analyzer, abdelrahman.wifianalyzerpro <== this is really nice
o Wifi Analyzer, com.farproc.wifi.analyzer.classic
o WiFi Analyzer, uk.co.soapysoft.wifianalyzer <== I like this one also

o WiFi Analyzer, com.wifianalyzer.networktools.networkanalyzer
o WiFi Signal Strength, com.northbridge.wifisignalstrength

These free apps even graph both WiFi & Cellular over time for you!
<https://i.postimg.cc/tJwN7TNZ/wifi04.jpg>

See also this proof where iOS users can only _pine_ for such power!

o It's a fact iOS devices can't even graph Wi-Fi signal strength over time
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/rX-L9xbYAQAJ>

FACTS:
Unfortunately, there are zero iOS apps (free or otherwise) with such modern
app functionality - where this functionality is useful to anyone who uses
WiFi or cellular anywhere in the world and who has the intelligence to
understand the power that these apps afford the user in everyday use.

--
Testing & proving on Usenet what Android & iOS can do, one fact at a time.

[Jenny Telia]

On 04/11/2019 09:42, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:20:08 +0100, Jenny Telia wrote:
>
>> Interesting monologue. Are you feeling lonely, Holder?
>
> Hi Jenny Telia,
>
> Thank you for pointing out iOS utterly lacks this basic app functionality.

So, a 'Yes' then.

[Janice Cortell]

Arlen _G_ Holder wrote

I didn't know about those applications until I read this.
First installed the Fritz application and found it works great.
It now replaces my settings application icon for this purpose.
Now I find the strongest signal by Fritz and connect using Fritz.
Many thanks.
Cheers.

[Raphael]

I found the progs informative and loaded a few from Google Play.
Did you?

[sms]

On 11/4/2019 5:55 AM, Raphael wrote:

<snip>

> I found the progs informative and loaded a few from Google Play.
> Did you?

"Arlen Holder" does occasionally post useful and informative
information. He just needs to work on his people skills.

He already knew that iOS does not allow apps like that so why would he
even bother to post that question in an iPhone group? It's just to annoy
people.

[nospam]

In article <qppims$5jl$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> "Arlen Holder" does occasionally post useful and informative
> information.

very, very rarely.

> He just needs to work on his people skills.

true.

> He already knew that iOS does not allow apps like that

yes it does.

in fact, what he claims to want to do can be done on ios, and he's even
been told how to do it, yet continues to refuse to acknowledge it.

> so why would he
> even bother to post that question in an iPhone group? It's just to annoy
> people.

to troll.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:13:14 -0800, sms wrote:

> "Arlen Holder" does occasionally post useful and informative
> information. He just needs to work on his people skills.

Hi Steve,

(I do admit I just do NOT have the people skills that you have, I agree!)
o But nobody here has ever found me wrong, not even once, on material fact!

However, on factual accuracy, you've _never_ once found my facts to be
materially wrong, and neither has anyone else, which is a testament to
someone who has posted on Usenet for something like two decades to never
have stated a materially incorrect fact. (1)

Remember you said that the Qualcomm agreement _lowered_ the royalties per
phone Steve? Where I easily proved (facts are funny that way) that the
royalty per phone _increased_ to 114% after Apple surrendered to Qualcomm
to obtain the 5G technology by next year (which, I had predicted the iPhone
would have been in dire straits otherwise, which is why Apple surrendered
billions of dollars _and_ the royalty relief they were asking for).

I strive for 100% verifiable factual accuracy in all my posts, Steve.

Having stellar factual credibility is actually easy since I don't post
facts unless they are already well verified well cited facts, and, you
know, Steve, I broke the news on the battery throttling, the Broadcom
fiasco, the Facepalm fiasco, etc., where my news to the group is on topic,
timely, and always factually correct.

Contrast my stellar factual accuracy record with the record from the listed
apologists, who brazenly deny even that which Apple admits, and who
incessantly fabricate wholly imaginary iOS app functionality, as Lewis,
Jolly Roger, nospam, Snit, and a host of others do all the time.

I used to believe them but when it ALWAYS turned out that they instantly
claim what always turns out to be wholly imaginary iOS app functionality, I
now know that even the best of these apologists, nospam, is as credible as
the result of a coin toss.

How could these people _survive_ in the Silicon Valley startup environment
I worked in for decades? They can't. One week and they'd be out. You
shouldn't be wrong even once, let alone more than half the time, and
survive out here.

The apologists are sadistic in how they send people on wild-goose chases
o Why do the Apple Apologists constantly send poor unsuspecting iOS users on wild goose chases?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/ynh0PE9lK_I/QOiGP4_SFQAJ>

> He already knew that iOS does not allow apps like that so why would he
> even bother to post that question in an iPhone group? It's just to annoy
> people.

Actually, nospam and the other apologists _clearly_ claim otherwise, where
the main problem with their claims is that they always fail the simplest of
all tests of any imaginary belief system, which is three simple words:

That is, if nospam claims the app functionality already exists in the App
Store, all nospam has to do is pass this simplest of all tests:
o Name just one

Note: It's a classic trick of nospam to claim he's told us so many times
before, where that's just his cop out since he claims imaginary
functionality on iOS constantly, as you are well aware, Steve.

It turns out the apologists have only 7 basic habits:
o What are the common well-verified psychological traits of the Apple Apologists on this newsgroup?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/18ARDsEOPzM/veU8FwAjBQAJ>

--
Bringing honest adult truth to these Apple newsgroups, 1 fact at a time.

(1) Nobody has ever found my factional statements to be material wrong
(despite the apologists who would _love_ to find me wrong, even once!),
simply because I don't say a material fact unless it's verifiable.
My belief system is based on fact, bolstered by facts, and, in the rare
cases where facts change or come to the fore, I'll change my belief system
to FIT the facts. This is what stands me off from the Apple Apologists.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 04 Nov 2019 11:21:33 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> He just needs to work on his people skills.
>
> true.

I suck at suffering morons & fools, nospam. I admit this openly & honestly.

For example, I've learned that nothing apologists say can ever be trusted,
since your record on credibility is worse than the result of a coin toss.

You apologists claim imaginary functionality all the time.

Why?
I don't know why.

o Why do Apple Apologists constantly brazenly fabricate what turns out to be wholly imaginary Apple functionality?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/SZfblCIRc9s/BNYMDpdXEgAJ>

I suspect you hate the obvious fact that iOS is decidedly primitive in app
functionality, so you just make up non-existing modern app functionality;
but I really don't know why you often claim app functionality that fails
the simplest test of imaginary belief systems...
o Name just one

>
>> He already knew that iOS does not allow apps like that
>
> yes it does.
>
> in fact, what he claims to want to do can be done on ios, and he's even
> been told how to do it, yet continues to refuse to acknowledge it.

If there's an app in the Apple app store doing what the Android apps do...
o Name just one

BTW, iOS is so utterly primitive, it can't even do what I did in the
opening post, which is list, all by its itty bitty self, the installed apps
into an editable text file, which is basic functionality Android can do in
so many ways it's not funny.

And yet, iOS is so easily shown to be primitive, all by its itty bitty self
iOS can't even list its installed apps into an editable text file!

--
Bringing TRUTH to this childish newsgroup, one adult fact at a time.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 04/11/2019 17.13, sms wrote:
> On 11/4/2019 5:55 AM, Raphael wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> I found the progs informative and loaded a few from Google Play.
>> Did you?
>
> "Arlen Holder" does occasionally post useful and informative
> information. He just needs to work on his people skills.

Absolutely :-D

> He already knew that iOS does not allow apps like that so why would he
> even bother to post that question in an iPhone group? It's just to annoy
> people.

But he also post it to the android group, and people like me that do not
have any Apple product don't care at all what they do or not. Yet
sometimes he groups me with "Apple lovers" , LOL.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 04/11/2019 18.31, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:13:14 -0800, sms wrote:
>
>> "Arlen Holder" does occasionally post useful and informative
>> information. He just needs to work on his people skills.
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> (I do admit I just do NOT have the people skills that you have, I agree!)
> o But nobody here has ever found me wrong, not even once, on material fact!

Oh, yes, we have, LOL :-D

... skip

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[sms]

On 11/7/2019 3:46 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

<snip>

> But he also post it to the android group, and people like me that do not
> have any Apple product don't care at all what they do or not. Yet
> sometimes he groups me with "Apple lovers" , LOL.

I have him filtered out of both groups so I don't see his posts.

But a lot of people have both Android and Apple devices, including me,
so sometimes it's relevant to post something to both groups, especially
when there's a feature that's available on one platform but available on
another platform.

I like my iPhone and my iPad but I have to admit that at times I've been
shocked and amazed that a very useful, and seemingly obvious feature is
available on Android but not available on iOS. I started off with
Android so I knew that these features existed. If you start off with iOS
then you're often unaware of some of the capabilities that are present
in Android devices but missing from iOS devices.

I think that "Arlen Holder" can rehabilitate himself because back when I
saw his posts I found that he told the truth about 60% of the time. He
can aspire to the level of you and I of telling the truth 100% of the
time, and can also work on his people skills.

[nospam]

In article <qq2ldk$slt$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> I like my iPhone and my iPad but I have to admit that at times I've been
> shocked and amazed that a very useful, and seemingly obvious feature is
> available on Android but not available on iOS. I started off with
> Android so I knew that these features existed. If you start off with iOS
> then you're often unaware of some of the capabilities that are present
> in Android devices but missing from iOS devices.

most of which actually *does* exist, which you've been repeatedly told
and continue to ignore.

there are also numerous ios features that are missing from android, or
only recently added.

neither product can do everything for everyone, nor should it.

> I think that "Arlen Holder" can rehabilitate himself because back when I
> saw his posts I found that he told the truth about 60% of the time. He
> can aspire to the level of you and I of telling the truth 100% of the
> time, and can also work on his people skills.

more like 0.6% for him, and you're not much better, certainly nowhere
near 100%, including what you wrote above.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 08/11/2019 03.54, sms wrote:
> On 11/7/2019 3:46 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> But he also post it to the android group, and people like me that do not
>> have any Apple product don't care at all what they do or not. Yet
>> sometimes he groups me with "Apple lovers" , LOL.
>
> I have him filtered out of both groups so I don't see his posts.
>
> But a lot of people have both Android and Apple devices, including me,
> so sometimes it's relevant to post something to both groups, especially
> when there's a feature that's available on one platform but available on
> another platform.

Agreed.

But too often he is staging war on Apple devices on the Android group,
hundreds of threads (difficult to know how many because as he changes
names often I can not select and count them in Thunderbid). I don't care
about the myriad of issues he finds on Apple things. I do not use Apple,
but it is impossible that Apple is so evil and dumbwits as he says they are.

>
> I like my iPhone and my iPad but I have to admit that at times I've been
> shocked and amazed that a very useful, and seemingly obvious feature is
> available on Android but not available on iOS. I started off with
> Android so I knew that these features existed. If you start off with iOS
> then you're often unaware of some of the capabilities that are present
> in Android devices but missing from iOS devices.

Sure.

> I think that "Arlen Holder" can rehabilitate himself because back when I
> saw his posts I found that he told the truth about 60% of the time. He
> can aspire to the level of you and I of telling the truth 100% of the
> time, and can also work on his people skills.

He certainly should work on his people skills.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <8s6g9g-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> > But a lot of people have both Android and Apple devices, including me,
> > so sometimes it's relevant to post something to both groups, especially
> > when there's a feature that's available on one platform but available on
> > another platform.
>
> Agreed.
>
> But too often he is staging war on Apple devices on the Android group,
> hundreds of threads (difficult to know how many because as he changes
> names often I can not select and count them in Thunderbid). I don't care
> about the myriad of issues he finds on Apple things. I do not use Apple,
> but it is impossible that Apple is so evil and dumbwits as he says they are.

nearly everything of what 'arlen' claims can't be done on ios is easily
done and he's even been told exactly how to do it on numerous
occasions, which he then ignores so he can continue to rant.

> > I like my iPhone and my iPad but I have to admit that at times I've been
> > shocked and amazed that a very useful, and seemingly obvious feature is
> > available on Android but not available on iOS. I started off with
> > Android so I knew that these features existed. If you start off with iOS
> > then you're often unaware of some of the capabilities that are present
> > in Android devices but missing from iOS devices.
>
> Sure.

that paragraph is completely false, and basically trolling.

i also use both android and ios, and although there is a lot of overlap
in functionality, there are numerous things each device can do that the
other cannot.

[sms]

On 11/8/2019 5:23 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

<snip>

>> I think that "Arlen Holder" can rehabilitate himself because back when I
>> saw his posts I found that he told the truth about 60% of the time. He
>> can aspire to the level of you and I of telling the truth 100% of the
>> time, and can also work on his people skills.
>
> He certainly should work on his people skills.

On Tuesday I was at an event where Vint Cerf
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vint_Cerf> spoke.

Someone asked him if the way the Internet evolved was how he expected it
to evolve. One thing he said that he never foresaw the level to which
individuals would be providing free content just to be helpful to
others. All the Youtube videos detailing how to perform various tasks
and all the informational web sites where the writer receives no
compensation, other than occasional affiliate links. Usenet used to be
like this! There were always a few jerks but they were in the minority.

Not to defend the way "Arlen Holder" behaves, but at least he posts
helpful information on occasion, and his accuracy rate is about 60%.
Contrast this with our favorite trolls who just make stuff up at whim,
rarely have any cites or references for anything they post, and when
they see something that they don't like but can't dispute, respond with
retorts like "bullshit," "you're trolling," "false," "wrong," "not
relevant," "there is no issue," "not widespread" "only a few people have
that problem," "I've never had that problem," etc.. Somehow they have to
learn that posting accurate, referenced, helpful information is what
makes Usenet useful, and that doing so would help repair their reputations.

When you know a lot about a subject and believe that your expertise
would be helpful to others, you can create a website, a YouTube video, a
blog, or a Google Doc (Docs, Sheets, Slides, etc), and include charts,
tables, diagrams, photos, etc. that make it much more informative.
That's why I did the Google Docs documents about the Apple Card, and the
two other documents about credit cards, as well as on several other
subjects where I have a lot of expertise.
<https://tinyurl.com/UsefulInformationSMS>

[nospam]

In article <qq48s8$jne$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

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

> When you know a lot about a subject and believe that your expertise
> would be helpful to others, you can create a website, a YouTube video, a
> blog, or a Google Doc (Docs, Sheets, Slides, etc), and include charts,
> tables, diagrams, photos, etc. that make it much more informative.
> That's why I did the Google Docs documents about the Apple Card, and the
> two other documents about credit cards, as well as on several other
> subjects where I have a lot of expertise.

no, you did it because you have an agenda and to collect analytics from
those who access it. any errors (and there are quite a few) will never
be corrected. several people have refuted much of what's on those
'documents' with numerous cites and nothing has changed.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 08:44:30 -0500, nospam wrote:

> i also use both android and ios, and although there is a lot of overlap
> in functionality, there are numerous things each device can do that the
> other cannot.

Hi nospam,

Your credibility is worse than the result of a coin toss.
o Meanwhile, you've never found a material fact from me to ever be wrong.

I'm not afraid of facts.
o Facts are what I use to form my belief system.

Let's see if you own an adult belief system, shall we?
o Adults comprehend facts.
o Adults assess those facts using logic & reason.

Let's use the simplest "name just one" rule of belief systems.
o A belief system is imaginary if it's supported by exactly 0 facts.

For my part, I'll ask the first question of myself:
o Either the app functionality exists today; or it doesn't.

The rules are the same as always, nospam, which you love to play your
little childish semantic games (see rules below).

QUESTION FOR ME:
Name a single app functionality Android has that iOS doesn't have:
o Automatic call recording
o Ability to load any launcher
o Ability to rename app icon names and put them in multiple places
o Ability to archive to portable APKs on any device all already installed apps (versions & all)
o Ability to remove the AdvertiserID & Google/Apple account from the device & still have full functionality
(I'll stop there for now; but it's a long list of what iOS doesn't have).

QUESTION FOR APOLOGISTS:
*Name a single app functionality iOS apps have that Android doesn't have?*
o *Name just one*

HINT: Other than imaginary functionality, the list is exactly 0.
--
NOTE: Don't play your childish semantic games; we're talking actual app
"functionality" not trademarks or brand names where the app is either on an
app store or it isn't; the device is not rooted/jailbroken; the
functionality can't require a second computer; the functdionality has to
work in the real world; and no, you can't claim that anyone can become a
Apple developer to write their own apps just to get the functionality that
is already on Android.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 00:49:14 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> Oh, yes, we have, LOL :-D

Carlos,

Usenet is filled with cowards like you, and Steve Scharf and nospam.
o All of you own a cowardly belief system based on exactly 0 facts.

Name just once, in my entire history on Usenet, where I've claimed a
material fact to you that you claim is wrong.
o Name just one

I realize you're not likely poorly educated, Carlos, so I do understand,
and sympathize that you almost certainly never went through a formal
educational process where the fact you make that statement above, with
exactly 0 facts supporting it, proves, beyond a doubt, that you can't
survive when your answers to all the questions are that easily shown to be
dead wrong.]

You, Steve Scharf, and nospam all make claims based on exactly 0 facts.
o You're all cowards.

The permanent Usenet record will show that you will fail this simple test:
o Name just one

On Usenet, cowardly ill-educated people like you survive quite well.
o But in the real world, Carlos, you couldn't survive being so dead wrong.

The fact is that I don't state material things which aren't facts, Carlos.

I do that because I'm an adult, Carlos.
o My belief system is _based_ on facts, Carlos.

The fact you can't find a _single_ instance where I've claimed a material
fact to you Carlos, that has ever been wrong, is a fact we will prove now.

If your belief system is not based on exactly 0 facts, Carlos, then simply
o Name just one

--
Carlos' entire belief system is based on exactly 0 facts.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Thu, 07 Nov 2019 22:07:40 -0500, nospam wrote:

> more like 0.6% for him, and you're not much better, certainly nowhere
> near 100%, including what you wrote above.

Steve Scharf is dead wrong a lot, but you're no better nospam.
o Your credibility is about as reliable as the result of a coin toss.

Meanwhile, nobody has ever shown my material facts to ever be wrong, which,
you'd think, isn't that big of a deal since I don't post anything that
isn't already a fact (unless it's a question); but on Usenet, that's a high
bar indeed.

A shockingly high bar on Usenet.

In formal education, it's normal to speak facts.

For example, in graduate school, it's _expected_ to speak only facts, where
just one wrong fact destroys your credibility just as at a startup, people
who bullshit constantly like you and Steve Scharf, couldn't last a month.

You can't be factually wrong even once, in those formal environments.

By huge contrast, on Usenet, bullshitters like Diesel, nospam, & Steve
Scharf, et al., last forever - simply because the bar is so low on facts.

Meanwhile, I'm not afraid of facts.

I challenge ANYONE here to find a single fact I've ever stated on Usenet in
my entire life that is materially wrong.
o Name just one

--
Bullshitters like Steve Scharf & nospam are afraid of facts; I'm not.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 18:54:41 -0800, sms wrote:

> I have him filtered out of both groups so I don't see his posts.

Now that I know this, it explains why you're so ignorant, Steve.

I've been posting answers to your questions, where I wondered why you were
so ignorant that you didn't realize the answers to your questions were
there, in the very thread.

This helps, because (a) I'm adding you to the worthless people list, and
(b) it means I won't spend _any_ energy in the future trying to help you.

My realization is that the utterly worthless people like you Steve Scharf,
prove to be completely immune to facts - where you actually go out of your
way to be immune to facts.

The permanent Usenet record will record that you choose to be immune to
fact since I have never once posted a material fact that anyone on this
planet has ever found to be wrong.

While that seems like a great claim for Usenet, it's not difficult at all
since everything I post is _based_ on facts.

For a graduate paper (e.g., a thesis), this wouldn't be unusual, nor would
this be unusual for someone in a high tech company to only speak of facts;
it's only unusual on Usenet because Usenet attracts ignorant cowards like
Steve Scharf who make claims based on exactly 0 facts.

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 13:03:34 -0500, nospam wrote:

> no, you did it because you have an agenda and to collect analytics from
> those who access it. any errors (and there are quite a few) will never
> be corrected. several people have refuted much of what's on those
> 'documents' with numerous cites and nothing has changed.

Steve Scharf clearly proves to be ignorant by what he posts, but you,
nospam, also clearly fabricate imaginary happenings.

Hence, your credibility, sans a reference, is worthless, nospam.

I'm not stating that Steve Scharf's credibility is not also nearly as
worthless as yours is, nospam - but I am asking you to be an adult and
simply back up your statement above with at least one fact.

It's what adults do, nospam.

If your belief system is based on even a _single_ fact, what fact do you
claim has been "refuted" on Steve Scharf's spreadsheets, that you claim
Steve has not corrected to date?

o Name just one

--

The problem with peole like nospam & Steve is that they make everything up.

[Arlen Holder]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:20:08 +0100, Jenny Telia wrote:

> Interesting monologue. Are you feeling lonely, Holder?

Adults will note this "Jenny Telia" sock never adds on-topic technical
value to _any_ thread, and, in fact, always posts off-topic child-like ad
homimen attacks & is often associated with these known worthless trolls:
o Shadow <S...@dow.br>
o "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)" <super...@fluffyunderbelly.invalid>

However, most recently directly associated with the Dan Purgert troll.
o Save your old freeware Epic privacy browser Windows installer as the new ones changed how they did VPN
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/7FwuZz7WNSk/oMsTMnNtGgAJ>

Here's just one of the many similar responses by this "Jenny Telia" sock:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/OpdPbjrbZM0/BIcP7Ny1CAAJ>
"The attention-seeking snowflake that is Arlen Holder is seeking
attention - again. Give it a break, honey and take up something useful,
like collecting belly-fluff."

This Jenny Telia sock is most often associated with Pooh & Shadow
(mostly on the freeware group) where their worthless posts track.

--
Two types of people are on Usenet: those who add value & those who can't.

[Jenny Telia]

Wrong conclusion. I am neither a part of Pooh's litter, nor do I shadow
Shadow. I am, however, the bitchy alter-ego of a poster here, who
contributes. I only switch to 'Telia'-mode when I see an annoying twerp
posting a nonsense post.

Clearly my approach is working, and I have got under your skin. Look at
how many of my (way-past) posts you have dug up, in order to add your
whining remarks to.

Stew in your own anger, Bitch.

[Arlen Holder]

On Sat, 22 Feb 2020 16:21:07 +0100, Jenny Telia wrote:

> Wrong conclusion. I am neither a part of Pooh's litter, nor do I shadow
> Shadow. I am, however, the bitchy alter-ego of a poster here, who
> contributes. I only switch to 'Telia'-mode when I see an annoying twerp
> posting a nonsense post.
>
> Clearly my approach is working, and I have got under your skin. Look at
> how many of my (way-past) posts you have dug up, in order to add your
> whining remarks to.
>
> Stew in your own anger, Bitch.

*Notice the instant hateful vitriol when we simply point to his own posts!*

Adult response went to a.c.f, from whence this Pooh/Shadow sock emanated.
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.comp.freeware/8hjHJzuLM3k/wzEn9dk8GwAJ>

[Arlen Holder]

UPDATE:

This current thread is perhaps yet another example of _why_ you may need
modern app capability tp log hot spots & dead spots on any mobile device:
o *iOS 13.4.1 wifi problems*, by Chris
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/QYW_x23IPRg>
--
Usenet is a public permanent archive of useful technical discussions.