cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philipp Kursawe <>
Subject Re: [Discuss] Why was removed from the device-plugin?
Date Fri, 17 Jun 2016 22:07:38 GMT
To further emphasize one point. I fully agree with moving from
to device.model + device.manufacturer + device.platform.
But I still ask all of you do consider bringing back a proper
As I wrote, on Windows its pretty easy to get the real name of the
PC/Phone. On iOS and Android the work is already done.

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Philipp Kursawe <>

> Thanks for pointing this out. However the name is not used to reference
> the device to the API. Thats what the device.uuid is being used for. The
> device name is used in the UI where the user can see its API enabled
> devices. You don't want to show the user the device id there (cause she has
> no point of reference to which physical device it belongs) but the name she
> gave her phone and knows her phone when she connects it to itunes, iphoto
> etc.
> So the reason to introduce the name property back is exactly the one you
> mentioned: The user can always change the name of her phone and there knows
> its name and will recognize it in a list of devices.
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Shazron <> wrote:
>> Hi Philipp,
>> This was the rationale:
>> On iOS,  [UIDevice name] returns the name the user sets in iTunes for
>> their
>> device i.e. "Shazron's iPhone 4", and can change anytime so relying on it
>> for API access would be problematic.
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:51 AM, Philipp Kursawe <>
>> wrote:
>> > I wonder why such an important piece of information is not provided
>> anymore
>> > in the device plugin?
>> > What was the reason to remove the property?
>> >
>> > The name of the device, especially when users can authorise/revoke API
>> > access to apps on different devices, is an important variable to know.
>> >
>> > There is a plugin that brings back this functionality for Android, iOS
>> and
>> > for Windows it would be a one-liner only too.
>> >
>> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message