mikejeep Posted February 7, 2017 Author Share Posted February 7, 2017 Hi all! Wanted to pass along another progress report. I am still fighting with the new Android API to get permissions properly recognized.. it's a difficult task because of the way the app is designed. As you have likely noticed in other apps by now, users have to physically accept a menu prompt to grant apps certain "sensitive" permissions. SignalCheck has a lot going on in the background, much of which requires permissions of this nature (specifically, the Phone and Location permissions, for obvious reasons). I am spending many many hours on this, so just keep trying to be patient! I need to get this finished before I can move onto the more fun things like native band identification (and fixing the LTE30 and 10x10 bugs -- I hear ya!) I promise, my alpha version doesn't have any secret new features you're all missing out on.. at least not yet.. -Mike P.S. #Brady #Belichick #GOAT :) 17 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imex99 Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Hi all! Wanted to pass along another progress report. I am still fighting with the new Android API to get permissions properly recognized.. it's a difficult task because of the way the app is designed. As you have likely noticed in other apps by now, users have to physically accept a menu prompt to grant apps certain "sensitive" permissions. SignalCheck has a lot going on in the background, much of which requires permissions of this nature (specifically, the Phone and Location permissions, for obvious reasons). I am spending many many hours on this, so just keep trying to be patient! I need to get this finished before I can move onto the more fun things like native band identification (and fixing the LTE30 and 10x10 bugs -- I hear ya!) I promise, my alpha version doesn't have any secret new features you're all missing out on.. at least not yet.. -Mike P.S. #Brady #Belichick #GOAT :) How about a PayPal email address to send you ur drink of choice to assist with ur long hours? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingenium Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 Hi all! Wanted to pass along another progress report. I am still fighting with the new Android API to get permissions properly recognized.. it's a difficult task because of the way the app is designed. As you have likely noticed in other apps by now, users have to physically accept a menu prompt to grant apps certain "sensitive" permissions. SignalCheck has a lot going on in the background, much of which requires permissions of this nature (specifically, the Phone and Location permissions, for obvious reasons). I am spending many many hours on this, so just keep trying to be patient! I need to get this finished before I can move onto the more fun things like native band identification (and fixing the LTE30 and 10x10 bugs -- I hear ya!) I promise, my alpha version doesn't have any secret new features you're all missing out on.. at least not yet.. -Mike P.S. #Brady #Belichick #GOAT :) I think what a lot of apps do is use the permissions all right away, so the user gets all the prompts at once. Not sure if that helps you at all...But maybe make dummy requests for the permission the first time the app is launched just to trigger the prompts. And if they deny any, just have the app close. Then request them again upon next launch (I think that's the default behavior actually). That way you don't have to change anything else in the app to handle scenarios where a permission is denied. Sent from my Pixel XL 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrrogers1 Posted February 8, 2017 Share Posted February 8, 2017 I think what a lot of apps do is use the permissions all right away, so the user gets all the prompts at once. Not sure if that helps you at all...But maybe make dummy requests for the permission the first time the app is launched just to trigger the prompts. And if they deny any, just have the app close. Then request them again upon next launch (I think that's the default behavior actually). That way you don't have to change anything else in the app to handle scenarios where a permission is denied. Sent from my Pixel XL If it can be done like that, I think it'd be par for the course on an app like this and the user should understand "if" they want use it. I think most of us gladly paid to allow all these permissions in the app. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefbal99 Posted February 17, 2017 Share Posted February 17, 2017 Mike any progress in the last ten days? Really looking forward to the new beta, whenever it is ready 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imex99 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Signal check not working on huawei union phone. Lte discovery is working but I have no clue why. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefbal99 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Signal check not working on huawei union phone. Lte discovery is working but I have no clue why. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Does it work when you are not on wifi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imex99 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Does it work when you are not on wifi? No difference, lte discovery works but not scp!!! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefbal99 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 No difference, lte discovery works but not scp!!! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I bet it starts working in the next update. I think LTE Discovery is using the newer hooks built into the OS, while Mike noted that he was using legacy methods of obtaining the data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingenium Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 I bet it starts working in the next update. I think LTE Discovery is using the newer hooks built into the OS, while Mike noted that he was using legacy methods of obtaining the data.That's possible. The phone in question though is on Android 5. The new APIs were introduced in android 7 I believe (could have been 6 though) Sent from my Pixel XL 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefbal99 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 That's possible. The phone in question though is on Android 5. The new APIs were introduced in android 7 I believe (could have been 6 though) Sent from my Pixel XL Oh, didn't realize it was that old... Is it a Sprint device or a different carrier? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imex99 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Oh, didn't realize it was that old... Is it a Sprint device or a different carrier? Freedompop, which uses Sprint. Was trying to use something for logging scp, etc.... Just submitted rma!!!! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overstew Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 Freedompop, which uses Sprint. Was trying to use something for logging scp, etc.... Just submitted rma!!!! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I think SignalCheck uses APIs for Qualcomm processor as it appears the signals are only read on devices using Qualcomm modems. Try Exynos/Kirin-based devices and you'll have a bad time. I think Mediatek processor (BLU HD R2) worked though so maybe Exynos/Kirin are using newer API that Signalcheck is just not utilizing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galaxyguy Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 I think SignalCheck uses APIs for Qualcomm processor as it appears the signals are only read on devices using Qualcomm modems. Try Exynos/Kirin-based devices and you'll have a bad time. I think Mediatek processor (BLU HD R2) worked though so maybe Exynos/Kirin are using newer API that Signalcheck is just not utilizing.The Note 5 works just fine with SCP. It has an Exynos processor. Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilotimz Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 The Note 5 works just fine with SCP. It has an Exynos processor. Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk But a Qualcomm modem. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galaxyguy Posted February 27, 2017 Share Posted February 27, 2017 But a Qualcomm modem. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk Ah, right. I forgot about that. Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvanA Posted March 2, 2017 Share Posted March 2, 2017 I think SignalCheck uses APIs for Qualcomm processor as it appears the signals are only read on devices using Qualcomm modems. Try Exynos/Kirin-based devices and you'll have a bad time. I think Mediatek processor (BLU HD R2) worked though so maybe Exynos/Kirin are using newer API that Signalcheck is just not utilizing.SignalCheck uses the high level Java API for accessing cellular connection info. It's up to the manufacturer to properly the back end of the API that interfaces with the modem. They likely don't really care and just expose signal strength for the bar display. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trip Posted March 11, 2017 Share Posted March 11, 2017 Mike, When you're ready for it, I have updates on Verizon and AT&T sector ID/band correlations. I don't have the AT&T handy, but in Savannah, Verizon is running 10x10 Band 5 and it's on sector IDs 0x11, 0x1B, and 0x25. (That's decimal 17, 27, and 37.) That makes the Verizon pattern overall, in decimal, from what I can determine: Band 13: 1/2/3/4/5/6 Band 4: 12/22/32/42/52/62 Band 4 (second carrier) 13/23/33/43/53/63 Band 2: 14/24/34/44/54/64 Band 5: 17/27/37/47/57/67 I assume that _0, _1, _5, and _6 are in use elsewhere, but not sure with what association. Logically, I could imagine that _5 is Band 2 second carrier, but I haven't actually seen that to confirm. For AT&T, I was able to see some second carriers and sectors above gamma. I'll have to dig through the logs for those when you're ready. The one I do recall off-hand is that I saw a 6-sector site in Naples where 0x95 through 0x9A were in use for Band 30. (SCP currently only shows 0x95 through 0x97 as Band 30, with the other three sectors being just "LTE".) - Trip 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trip Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 In Charleston today, I saw Band 2 second carrier on Verizon and it was the _5 set. (0x0F, 0x19, 0x23) I'm wondering if _6 is a placeholder for a future second carrier on Band 5. The Band 5 carrier I saw with _7 was 10x10 centered at 885 MHz for downlink, which would be in the B-block. Since the entire band is 25x25, even if Verizon controls both licenses, they have to have two carriers to fill it with LTE since, according to Wikipedia at least, the Band 5 maximum bandwidth is 10x10 (though the Band 26 maximum is 15x15, so they could do a 10x10 Band 5 and a 15x15 Band 26). - Trip 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingenium Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Mike, When you're ready for it, I have updates on Verizon and AT&T sector ID/band correlations. I don't have the AT&T handy, but in Savannah, Verizon is running 10x10 Band 5 and it's on sector IDs 0x11, 0x1B, and 0x25. (That's decimal 17, 27, and 37.) That makes the Verizon pattern overall, in decimal, from what I can determine: Band 13: 1/2/3/4/5/6 Band 4: 12/22/32/42/52/62 Band 4 (second carrier) 13/23/33/43/53/63 Band 2: 14/24/34/44/54/64 Band 5: 17/27/37/47/57/67 I assume that _0, _1, _5, and _6 are in use elsewhere, but not sure with what association. Logically, I could imagine that _5 is Band 2 second carrier, but I haven't actually seen that to confirm. For AT&T, I was able to see some second carriers and sectors above gamma. I'll have to dig through the logs for those when you're ready. The one I do recall off-hand is that I saw a 6-sector site in Naples where 0x95 through 0x9A were in use for Band 30. (SCP currently only shows 0x95 through 0x97 as Band 30, with the other three sectors being just "LTE".) - Trip In Pittsburgh, PA, Verizon's band 2 is sometimes sector 13. From Cell Mapper: What's interesting is they did a spectrum swap with ATT to get 10 MHz contiguous, and moved the location of their 5x5 B2 carrier accordingly. It seems they also changed the sector ID as well. In this case, Verizon's sector 14 is from pre swap, and 13 is from post swap. On the periphery of the market they expanded to a full 10x10, but within the city limits according to my SDR they still have 2 CDMA carriers in the other half of their 10x10 chunk. When they have a 10x10 deployed, 14 is a sector that they're currently using (I last saw it today). Sent from my Pixel XL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JossMan Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Signalcheck isn't recognizing an NSN mini macro site, is this a known issue? It seems they are using different GCI pattern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilotimz Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Signalcheck isn't recognizing an NSN mini macro site, is this a known issue? It seems they are using different GCI pattern. Screenshot_20170329-164017.png Si. Mike is working on a big update that includes identification for mini macs. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiWavelength Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Si. Mike is working on a big update that includes identification for mini macs. Apple does not offer an LTE option on the Mac mini, you silly rabbit. AJ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkyeager Posted March 29, 2017 Share Posted March 29, 2017 Signalcheck isn't recognizing an NSN mini macro site, is this a known issue? It seems they are using different GCI pattern. Screenshot_20170329-164017.png The list is much longer. Add b25 2nd carrier 10x10, air harmony 4000s and 1000s, in store b41. Android 7.0 has support for identifying this built in via earfcns for sites and neighbors unrooted, but tricky to program. Others want $$. SCP is our best hope. Sent from my LG-LS980 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kct1975 Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 Mike, When you're ready for it, I have updates on Verizon and AT&T sector ID/band correlations. I don't have the AT&T handy, but in Savannah, Verizon is running 10x10 Band 5 and it's on sector IDs 0x11, 0x1B, and 0x25. (That's decimal 17, 27, and 37.) That makes the Verizon pattern overall, in decimal, from what I can determine: Band 13: 1/2/3/4/5/6 Band 4: 12/22/32/42/52/62 Band 4 (second carrier) 13/23/33/43/53/63 Band 2: 14/24/34/44/54/64 Band 5: 17/27/37/47/57/67 I assume that _0, _1, _5, and _6 are in use elsewhere, but not sure with what association. Logically, I could imagine that _5 is Band 2 second carrier, but I haven't actually seen that to confirm. For AT&T, I was able to see some second carriers and sectors above gamma. I'll have to dig through the logs for those when you're ready. The one I do recall off-hand is that I saw a 6-sector site in Naples where 0x95 through 0x9A were in use for Band 30. (SCP currently only shows 0x95 through 0x97 as Band 30, with the other three sectors being just "LTE".) - Trip In Charleston today, I saw Band 2 second carrier on Verizon and it was the _5 set. (0x0F, 0x19, 0x23) I'm wondering if _6 is a placeholder for a future second carrier on Band 5. The Band 5 carrier I saw with _7 was 10x10 centered at 885 MHz for downlink, which would be in the B-block. Since the entire band is 25x25, even if Verizon controls both licenses, they have to have two carriers to fill it with LTE since, according to Wikipedia at least, the Band 5 maximum bandwidth is 10x10 (though the Band 26 maximum is 15x15, so they could do a 10x10 Band 5 and a 15x15 Band 26). - Trip Awesome information...as usual! Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.