I have somewhat similar concern for iOS: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1837
Wonder whether we should output the model number instead eg iPad2,5 This might solve the comical procedure to detect an iPad Mini (at least for Cordova): http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13248493/detect-ipad-mini-in-html5 On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > Resurrecting this one. > > BlackBerry has the same issue sorta. > > I have two play books. One is running 2.0.1.xxx, another 2.1.0.xxx. When I > ask for "device.version", I get "BlackBerry Playbook OS" for both. > > Device.name also returns weird stuff for the play books, seem like > arbitrary numbers: 100669958. > > Also, device.platform returns "playbook". Shouldn't this be "BlackBerry" ? > > /cc anyone from RIM > > On 11/12/12 7:27 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b...@brian.io> wrote: > > >thanks shaz > > > > > >On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Added: > >> > >> http://issues.cordova.io/1836 > >> http://issues.cordova.io/1837 > >> http://issues.cordova.io/1838 > >> http://issues.cordova.io/1839 > >> http://issues.cordova.io/1840 > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Adding jira tasks as per Brian's last comment. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> +1 sounds like a plan > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> +1 > >> >>> > >> >>> On 11/8/12 4:01 AM, "Brian LeRoux" <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> >I think would it make sense to: > >> >>> > > >> >>> >1. align apis as orig msg from fil suggests > >> >>> >2. drop in deprecation notice for sync usage and add to deprec page > >> >>> >3. add async equiv and get it out of startup path as andrew > >>suggests > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> >On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> >>> > > >> >>> >> Although I think we're close to being able to author > >>cross-platform > >> >>> apps > >> >>> >> sans UA detection , I think people still have valid use cases to > >>use > >> >>> it. > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> On 11/7/12 6:18 PM, "Andrew Grieve" <agri...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> >I like the idea of at least removing this from the start-up > >>path. > >> If > >> >>> >>users > >> >>> >> >want to know about the device, they could always call exec() > >> >>> >>themselves. > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> > >>wrote: > >> >>> >> > > >> >>> >> >> Also, if we remove the device API like Brian suggested, it > >>would > >> be > >> >>> >> >>good in > >> >>> >> >> the sense that we won't have to call the CDVDevice plugin to > >> >>> populate > >> >>> >> >>some > >> >>> >> >> js variables before deviceready can fire -- eliminating a > >> >>> dependency. > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:00 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > Agree with Fil to make it consistent - in essence this is an > >> iOS > >> >>> >>bug > >> >>> >> >>:) > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> > Brian, there is one case I can think of -- detecting the > >>iPad > >> >>> >>mini's > >> >>> >> >> > features using js - Max Firt investigated trying to do it > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> > >> > >> > http://www.mobilexweb.com/blog/ipad-mini-detection-for-html5-user-agentbu > >> >>> >> >>tthe only kludgy way right now using PG would be > >>device.platform > >> to > >> >>> >> >> > detect iPad2,5 and iPad2,6. I suppose ppl would need to > >>detect > >> >>> >>this to > >> >>> >> >> > enlarge certain UI elements for the mini (since the physical > >> area > >> >>> >> >>will be > >> >>> >> >> > smaller than a reg sized iPad) > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> CI implementation is what I am gunning for here (and can > >> >>> actually > >> >>> >>use > >> >>> >> >> it). > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> I don't like it either but reality is for people building > >> >>> >> >>cross-platform > >> >>> >> >> >> apps at some point you have to do: > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> if (device.platform == 'android') // do some stuff > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> For example, knowing when to attach to a back button vs > >> >>> rendering > >> >>> >> >>some > >> >>> >> >> ui > >> >>> >> >> >> to handle that. > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> IMO we should set up deprecation for "name" and move to > >> "model" > >> >>> as > >> >>> >> >>it's > >> >>> >> >> >> clearer (and probably was the reason why iOS went for > >>device's > >> >>> >>custom > >> >>> >> >> name > >> >>> >> >> >> in the first place - semantic confusion :P ) > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> On 11/7/12 7:35 AM, "Brian LeRoux" <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> >This may get some rotton tomatoes thrown at me but I > >>would be > >> >>> in > >> >>> >> >>favor > >> >>> >> >> of > >> >>> >> >> >> >axing these apis altogether. I think they are more > >>dangerous > >> >>> than > >> >>> >> >> useful > >> >>> >> >> >> / > >> >>> >> >> >> >developers should favor browser feature detection for > >>their > >> UI > >> >>> >>work. > >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> >There is no programmatic reason to want these properties > >> >>> >>otherwise > >> >>> >> >> that I > >> >>> >> >> >> >can think of? > >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> >(But agree at least should be consistent as Fil suggests.) > >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> >On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> >> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> >> >> Currently if you ask for device.platform you will get > >> several > >> >>> >> >> different > >> >>> >> >> >> >> responses on iOS. You'll get iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, > >>etc. > >> >>> >>This > >> >>> >> >> seems > >> >>> >> >> >> >> backwards. IMO all of these should return 'iOS'. > >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> Related, device.name returns the custom device name as > >>the > >> >>> user > >> >>> >> >> >> defines > >> >>> >> >> >> >>it > >> >>> >> >> >> >> in iTunes. IMO it should return the model name, I.e. > >>What > >> >>> >> >> >> >>device.platform > >> >>> >> >> >> >> returns now. > >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> This would line it up with our docs + other platforms. > >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >>> >> >> > > >> >>> >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > >> > >
