cellhunter - openbmap - opencellid revisited... (was Re: CellHunter is moving to a new server)

[Yorick Moko]

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Risto H. Kurppa <risto at kurppa.fi> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Thomas
> Landspurg<t.landspurg at 8motions.com> wrote:
> >  Again , and clarifiacation:
> >
> >  ObenBMap have in fact less than 82963 cells (the 'trusted' cells),
> > the others are coming from OpenCellId! ;)
>
> Yes, I knew that OBM had imported from OCI but to me the only thing
> that matters is how many cells a service has to be used to calculate
> the locations of cells, no matter where's the data from. The more data
> a service has, the more reliable & usable it is for a user (if there
> were applications capable of using any of the services to do the
> location). So if all three services would sync their info daily/weekly
> with having some of their own extra fields I'd be happy as they all
> would benefit from each other and they all would have the same sources
> to do the locationing the only difference being the algorithms. Yes of
> course it'd be a waste of work to maintain three databases.. but isn't
> that the case now anyway?
>
> >  I would be fine also to reintegrate cells from CellsHunter into
> OpenCellID too
>
> Is there something that stops you from doing so?
>
> r
>
> this is how I see it, from an end-user point-of-view:

openBmap has the most cells
openBmap maps the most information

all I want is as much cells as possible
AND
know that I'm logging everything that increases the quality of the data
(AFAIK cellhunter logs less information)

openBmap does the trick for both of them

this is of course a personal opinion

y
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/attachments/20090903/309e606c/attachment.htm