Which app do you use to scan/debug GSM/CDMA cellular tower s

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 09:25:27 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote:

There is no way the phone can determine the location of the tower from
the signal, the antenna is non-directional. It has to be determined from
a map of locations. Maybe the tower gives that info, I don't know.

That non-directional antenna explanation makes a ton of sense!
Thank you for being one of the few scientifically sound people here!

That explains my observation that the antenna location is not even close to
the direction that OpenSignal points to. It's essentially fluff.

That's pretty much the last straw on this silly OpenSignal app.
The more I look at this lousy OpenSignal app, the less I like it.

I had already put it as my last choice on Android since it was basically
far less functional than every other choice, but I kept it on the list
simply because it was the only tool I found that was also on iOS.

So OpenSignal was my only 1:1 comparison with iOS.

Like all the apps listed, OpenSignal was first written for Android, so
you'd think that when they finally ported the app to iOS that it would work
better.

It turns out OpenSignal stinks on iOS even worse than it stinks on Android.

If you're on iOS, you're stuck with it, but if you're on Android, my
recommendation is to ditch OpenSignal in favor of Jeff's number one app
(which is my #2 app becasuse I'm using teh freeware while Jeff is using the
Pro version) and my number one or number two apps (as listed in the op).

01 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

02 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 a log of the cell towers that your phone connected to, then the
app to use is my number 4 app:

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

You won't be able to get logging or cell tower identification from iOS
unfortunately, so we should probably drop the iOS newsgroup from this
discussion as it's not relevant to them.

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 09:50:36 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

I haven't been able to make the T-Mobile vs Verizon comparison as I
have never used T-Mobile.
AT&T has always been bad out here, as a result I have been with Verizon
since the days when they were still GTE.

The difference between ATT/Sprint and T-Mobile/Verizon was stark.

I have good friends in a state where Verizon dominates and I helped them
get two ways to *test* out T-Mobile coverage for free.

One is that T-Mobile will actually lend you a phone for a period of time (a
month? two weeks? I forget) where you can use the phone all you want to
test out the coverage.

The other is that T-Mobile will give you a SIM card (generally that costs a
nominal one-time fee) for any tablet, which will have a 200MB/month plan,
which I'm sure you're aware of.

Either of those options should give you plenty of time to test out T-Mobile
coverage, side to side with your current Verizon phone.

And you won't even have to fake your own death to get off the Verizon
contract! (jk)

 

[nospam]

In article <nkoind-hkg.ln1@minas-tirith.valinor>, Carlos E. R.
<robin_listas@invalid.es> wrote:

There is no way the phone can determine the location of the tower from
the signal, the antenna is non-directional. It has to be determined from
a map of locations. Maybe the tower gives that info, I don't know.

they do.

long ago, i used to put an old flip phone into service mode and see the
lat/long of the towers as it handed off.

 

[nospam]

In article <o879br$nht$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong
<stijndekonlng@nlnet.nl> wrote:

off topic observation
I dropped Verizon when they added a two-year contract just for replacing a
Kyocera phone that broke which I had under an insurance plan. That's where
I learned the insurance plan had gotchas they don't tell you about; so the
second that the additional two years were up, I went to AT&T (and saved a
few bucks, as it turned out).

I kept AT&T for about 4 or 5 years until I needed a plan sans data for my
family plan. The Blackberry was grandfathered, but AT&T wouldn't allow me
to have what they called a "smart phone" without data, even though they'd
happily block data (saying it was for "my protection"). I dropped AT&T like
a hot potatoe like I dropped Netflix when they changed their plan, and
never looked back on either one.

Moving to T-Mobile, I loved that they did everything differently. I mean
everything. I could buy my own phone. No contract. No data overage charges
ever.

you can buy your own phone with any carrier.

until recently, the carriers would have preferred that since you would
have been paying a subsidy for a phone they did not subsidize. that's
more money for them.

now that they've mostly separated the phone price and the plan price,
they don't really care. sure, they'd love it if you bought it from them
but if you bring your own that's fine too (as long as it's compatible
with the network).

Calling Europe was 20 cents a minute. Data is unlimited in Europe. No
roaming charges. And, I didn't have to have data if I didn't want it. I
could get phones from them for an additional $50 over what I could get on
the market, where they'd charge me 1/24th the phone on the bill. I didn't
even have to tell them what phone I was using. Everything about T-Mobile
was different than Verizon & AT&T.

you don't have to tell any carrier what phone you're using.

they already know.

 

[Savageduck]

On 2017-02-17 17:12:20 +0000, Stijn De Jong <stijndekonlng@nlnet.nl> said:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 22:51:15 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

OK! In that case, I will put it bluntly; AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint
coverage, roaming aside, in the Lake Nacimiento area, ??13 miles West
of Paso Robles, California totally sucks. Conversely Verizon coverage
is actually quite good in the same area, particularly given that the
only towers in the area belong to Verizon.

Coverage maps:
https://opensignal.com/network-coverage-maps/

Dunno exactly where you are, so I have to just look at the lake itself.

If I pick the area under the words "Lake Nacimiento" on the map as the
point of reference, it seems that T-Mobile and Verizon are about the same,
while AT&T and Sprint suck by way of comparison.

AT&T: http://i.cubeupload.com/Mk740J.jpg

Sprint: http://i.cubeupload.com/oYhuXd.jpg

T-Mobile: http://i.cubeupload.com/i2SMJH.jpg

Verizon: http://i.cubeupload.com/ReQily.jpg

I am probably located just below the "C" of "Nacimiento". Those
coverage maps pretty much detail my experience.

I haven't been able to make the T-Mobile vs Verizon comparison as I
have never used T-Mobile.
AT&T has always been bad out here, as a result I have been with Verizon
since the days when they were still GTE.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

 

[nospam]

In article <o87eo6$12cr$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong
<stijndekonlng@nlnet.nl> wrote:

I haven't been able to make the T-Mobile vs Verizon comparison as I
have never used T-Mobile.
AT&T has always been bad out here, as a result I have been with Verizon
since the days when they were still GTE.

The difference between ATT/Sprint and T-Mobile/Verizon was stark.

that depends where.

in major urban areas, there's no significant difference among any of
the carriers, while in rural areas, one might be better than another,
and which carrier that is will vary.

even verizon has dead spots. all carriers do.

I have good friends in a state where Verizon dominates and I helped them
get two ways to *test* out T-Mobile coverage for free.

One is that T-Mobile will actually lend you a phone for a period of time (a
month? two weeks? I forget) where you can use the phone all you want to
test out the coverage.

that's not unique to t-mobile.

most providers (either direct or mvno) offer a 'test drive' where you
sign up and can get a full refund (other than usage fees outside of
your plan) within a week or two if you're not satisfied. in some cases,
certain usage patterns indicates acceptance, even within the trial
period. read the fine print.

The other is that T-Mobile will give you a SIM card (generally that costs a
nominal one-time fee) for any tablet, which will have a 200MB/month plan,
which I'm sure you're aware of.

that doesn't do much good if there's no t-mobile coverage in the places
where someone wants to use it.

Either of those options should give you plenty of time to test out T-Mobile
coverage, side to side with your current Verizon phone.

the easiest way is pop in a t-mobile sim.

or just ask people who actually use t-mobile in the same area.

 

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-02-17 03:25, Carlos E. R. wrote:

There is no way the phone can determine the location of the tower from
the signal, the antenna is non-directional. It has to be determined from
a map of locations. Maybe the tower gives that info, I don't know.

Cell antennas are very directional.
A level at a tower rented by carrier will have a number of antennas each
pointing different directions.

Carriers spend oddles of time and sofphisticated software for
propagation analysis to precisely orient antennas to maximise re-use of
frequencies and maximize coverage.

If you have 2 nearby towers, the beams aimed to cover the area betwene
the 2 twoers will have different frequencies. But beams facing away from
each other can use the same frequencies since they won't interfere with
each other.

While you would know the ID of the antenna/radio to which your phone
connected, and the GPS location of tower that holds that antenna, you
woudln't know the orientation of the antenna. Propagation delays might
give you estimate of how far you are from antenna. But that would
represent a circle all around antenna.

If your phone can see signals from another antenna, then this may be
able to narrow that circle to only the part that faces the other antenna.

However, since modern phone have built-in GPS, they already know their
location.

 

[Carlos E. R.]

On 2017-02-17 19:53, JF Mezei wrote:

On 2017-02-17 03:25, Carlos E. R. wrote:

There is no way the phone can determine the location of the tower from
the signal, the antenna is non-directional. It has to be determined from
a map of locations. Maybe the tower gives that info, I don't know.


Cell antennas are very directional.

I know. We installed them at a small company I worked with.
But the antenna on the mobile phone is not. The mobile can not know the
direction of the signal from the signal alone, that's what I said.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

 

[sms]

On 2/17/2017 8:45 AM, Stijn De Jong wrote:

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 23:41:10 -0500, nospam wrote:

tl;dr - coverage varies. choose the carrier who has coverage in the
areas in which you travel and at a fair price. do not count on roaming.
there is no single 'best' for everyone.

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 20:13:54 -0800, Savageduck wrote:

T-Mobile does have much better rural coverage than AT&T, but nowhere as
good as I get with Verizon.

I've had all three, Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile.

Out here in the Silicon Valley, coverage seems about the same for each,
although I had them in series, and not sequentially (except for a few
concomitant burner phones).

OMG. No way. Verizon is far superior in Silicon Valley and the Bay Area.
T-Mobile is useless outside the urban and suburban core, and their rural
coverage is far inferior to AT&T or Verizon, and it's gotten worse as
they've dropped roaming onto AT&T in the surrounding areas.

If you want coverage up in the surrounding hills and mountains of
Silicon Valley you need Verizon. I currently have AT&T, having migrated
from Verizon, and the difference is stark. I have an iPad on Verizon,
provided to me, and Verizon was chosen because it's the only carrier
that works in the civic center area of Cupertino. One day I had to make
a call from there and I couldn't use my AT&T phone so I used Hangouts on
the iPad and used Google Voice. Looks pretty ridiculous using an iPad
Air as a phone, but it worked.

In San Francisco, my sister-in-law works at a major hospital close to
the Castro, and only Verizon works inside.

Once you leave the Bay Area and travel out toward the center of the
state, and gold country and the Sierras, T-Mobile is essentially
unusable. They don't even try to duplicate the coverage of AT&T, let
alone Verizon. Verizon bought out Golden State Cellular which did a very
good job of covering rural areas.

Try driving over 152 out to I-5. You lose T-Mobile coverage just about
the time you can no longer smell the garlic in Gilroy and head up over
Pacheco pass. Then on I-5 south, T-Mobile coverage is very spotty. We go
on that route several times a year since a child-unit is in college in
San Diego. We had T-Mobile briefly in 2015 because we were in Europe and
I wanted the included SMS, low speed data, and 20˘/minute voice, and I
cancelled it about a month after we got back because it was so horrible.

 

[nospam]

In article <o87jb6$hnn$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

Out here in the Silicon Valley, coverage seems about the same for each,
although I had them in series, and not sequentially (except for a few
concomitant burner phones).

OMG. No way. Verizon is far superior in Silicon Valley and the Bay Area.

they're all about the same.

T-Mobile is useless outside the urban and suburban core, and their rural
coverage is far inferior to AT&T or Verizon, and it's gotten worse as
they've dropped roaming onto AT&T in the surrounding areas.

t-mobile's coverage is steadily getting *better*, not worse.

In San Francisco, my sister-in-law works at a major hospital close to
the Castro, and only Verizon works inside.

that has more to do with the frequencies used than the carrier.

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:35:54 -0500, nospam wrote:

The difference between ATT/Sprint and T-Mobile/Verizon was stark.

that depends where.

I agree.
My comment was only in relation to the locale that Savageduck reported,
which was Lake Nac...Naci......eh ... Lake N-something.

in major urban areas, there's no significant difference among any of
the carriers, while in rural areas, one might be better than another,
and which carrier that is will vary.

Yup. I just ran an Opensignal report for Cupertino, California, and
T-Mobile arguably is slightly better than AT&T & Verizon, but they're
effectively the same.

AT&T http://i.cubeupload.com/2NuF7b.jpg
T-Mobile http://i.cubeupload.com/o8kiZ9.jpg
Verizon http://i.cubeupload.com/dcfRhq.jpg

> even verizon has dead spots. all carriers do.

All three maps show holes in the coverage, even in Cupertino, which is
essentially near the heart of Silicon Valley.

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:11:10 -0800, sms wrote:

For users that never travel outside of urban areas T-Mobile is usable,
but if you like to travel to, or through, rural areas, it's not a good
choice.

I travel a decent amount around northern California, given I have grandkids
in various schools and kids scattered about with family.

T-Mobile is fine.

Since none of us are gonna run our own tests with three phones in our hands
for weeks on end, I would guess the coverage maps are what we'll have to
use.

What's the best coverage map site that covers all three carriers?
We can arbitrary pick where you live and where I live and see how the
coverage goes.

Here is OpenSignal for, say, the middle of Cupertino, for example.

All I did was:
1. Go to https://opensignal.com/network-coverage-maps/
2. Pick the carrier
3. Type in "Cupertino, CA"

I left the zoom level and everything else exactly as it was found.
AT&T http://i.cubeupload.com/2NuF7b.jpg
T-Mobile http://i.cubeupload.com/o8kiZ9.jpg
Verizon http://i.cubeupload.com/dcfRhq.jpg

Looking at those maps, they're about the same, although I could argue there
are fewer holes in T-Mobile than in either AT&T or Verizon, but I'll just
say they're about the same which is a tenable assertion.

 

[Lewis]

In message <o87b2f$riu$1@gioia.aioe.org> Stijn De Jong <stijndekonlng@nlnet.nl> wrote:

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 06:58:46 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

I get good coverage all over Denver, but it is pretty lousy inside my
house, so I have a (free) T-mobile CellSpot that provides LTE coverage
inside the house (and almost certainly improves the coverage for my
neighbors).

T-Mobile calls *all* their home devices a "CellSpot", so which one do you
have?

The one that provides LTE coverage. As far as I know, they only have one
of those.

> How many decibels of cellular signal do you get from them?

In the basement (cellspot is in the garage) I have -78dB currently. If I
go into the garage it's about -60dB-65dB, IIRC.

--
'Luck is my middle name,' said Rincewind, indistinctly. 'Mind you, my
first name is Bad.' --Interesting Times

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 13:53:26 -0500, JF Mezei wrote:

While you would know the ID of the antenna/radio to which your phone
connected, and the GPS location of tower that holds that antenna, you
woudln't know the orientation of the antenna. Propagation delays might
give you estimate of how far you are from antenna. But that would
represent a circle all around antenna.

As a somewhat related aside, in one article I read about tower cell ids,
the first number tells you which sector antenna you're using.

So, you can, with a bit of effort, narrow down the tower and the sector
that you're connected to.

But it takes work.

 

[Lewis]

In message <170220171335545844%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

In article <o87eo6$12cr$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Stijn De Jong
stijndekonlng@nlnet.nl> wrote:


I haven't been able to make the T-Mobile vs Verizon comparison as I
have never used T-Mobile.
AT&T has always been bad out here, as a result I have been with Verizon
since the days when they were still GTE.

The difference between ATT/Sprint and T-Mobile/Verizon was stark.

that depends where.

in major urban areas, there's no significant difference among any of
the carriers, while in rural areas, one might be better than another,
and which carrier that is will vary.

Depends on the "major" urban area. For example, T-Mobile is absolutely
unusable in Omaha, which is a pretty decent sized city (about a million
for its CSA). I could sometimes get signal if I was outside and stood
quite still.

OTOH, I looked at it as just one more shitty thing about Omaha.

> even verizon has dead spots. all carriers do.

Sure. At my Mom's house there was no signal at all for Sprint and only
"standing in the backyard" signal with Verizon, while both AT&T and
T-Mobile were fine.

However, I will say that up until a few years ago it sure seemed like
Verizon had fewer than the others. Now I feel like T-Mobile has caught
up.

> or just ask people who actually use t-mobile in the same area.

That seems like the best plan.

--
'Is it heroic to die like this?' said Conina. 'I think it is,' he said,
'and when it comes to dying, there's only one opinion that matters.'

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 01:25:52 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

The one that provides LTE coverage. As far as I know, they only have one
of those.

I have two completely different types of CellSpot devices, both of which
say LTE.

Here is a photo of one type in my house, called "CellSpot" and "LTE":
http://i.cubeupload.com/uNXXgZ.jpg

Here is a photo of another type alongside it, also called "CellSpot" and
"LTE":
https://u.cubeupload.com/WoN2gQ.jpg

They are extremely different, even though the T-Mobile MARKETING calls both
of them a "CellSpot" and "4G LTE".
https://u.cubeupload.com/dIGbMo.jpg

Which type do you have?
The whole reason for this thread was to distinguish between the two.

How many decibels of cellular signal do you get from them?

In the basement (cellspot is in the garage) I have -78dB currently. If I
go into the garage it's about -60dB-65dB, IIRC.

That's absolutely astoundingly high cellular signal strength (RSSI).
All the articles put the range at -50 to -110 or -120dBm.

Are you getting that from your T-Mobile micro tower?
How do you know? (Because that's the entire reason for this thread.)

 

[Lewis]

In message <nkoind-hkg.ln1@minas-tirith.valinor> Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@invalid.es> wrote:

On 2017-02-16 21:57, Stijn De Jong wrote:
The one potentially nice thing that OpenSignal provided on Android was a
compass-like pointer toward the tower it's connected to; however, that
pointer doesn't seem even remotely aligned with where I know that tower to
be, so, I'm not sure if that compass-like pointer is fluff or if there is a
major reflection of radio waves going on off of someone's solar panel array
or expansive windows overlooking the valley below.

There is no way the phone can determine the location of the tower from
the signal,

Sure they can. The signal include Latitude and Longitude for the tower.

--
One by one the bulbs burned out, like long lives come to their expected
ends.

 

[Lewis]

In message <58a7672f$0$9555$b1db1813$e2fc9064@news.astraweb.com> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

T-Mo had shutdown that antenna because AT&T was already covering the
area.

Well, at least it's not just with Apple that you pull this sort of shit.

--
When men talk to their friends, they insult each other. They don't
really mean it.
When women talk to their friends, they compliment each other. They don't
really mean it.

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 01:36:14 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

Depends on the "major" urban area. For example, T-Mobile is absolutely
unusable in Omaha, which is a pretty decent sized city (about a million
for its CSA). I could sometimes get signal if I was outside and stood
quite still.

Here is the coverage map after typing a search for "Omaha, NE" and not
changing anything else about the results, not even the zoom level.
https://opensignal.com/network-coverage-maps/

AT&T: http://i.cubeupload.com/o8tcQ1.jpg
T-Mobile: http://i.cubeupload.com/9hAnt7.jpg
Verizon: http://i.cubeupload.com/Jp4zQB.jpg

Overall, for the center of Omaha, Verizon looks better than AT&T which
looks better than T-Mobile.

 

[Stijn De Jong]

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:44:12 -0500, nospam wrote:

OMG. No way. Verizon is far superior in Silicon Valley and the Bay Area.

they're all about the same.

I've had all three, although not concurrently.
I go camping a lot, and skiing, where I'm with a bunch of guys, all of whom
are on the various carriers.

Over the years, it's been getting better and better on all the carriers,
but sometimes Verizon is the lousy one, sometimes AT&T, and sometimes
T-Mobile.

As nospam said, they're all about the same.
And I've had Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile (in that order) in the same
location.

However, the only true test would be to have all three similar phones in
your hands at the same time for the tests, which nobody is gonna do.

So everyone is just guessing with bad data (sort of like how climate change
debates go).