"resolution_width" capability behavior is weird.

[virendrad]

Hi Elliot,

I got your point that using the request user agent its not possible, but I was suggesting that if you guys can update these values manually for all iPhone models to return the correct logical resolution like you did for "max_image_width" for desktops.

Also, model_name capability provides me value "iPhone" and complete_device_name capability provides me value "Apple iPhone". Is it possible to get the version as well like for iPhone 4, I want 4 to be returned. For iPhone 5, I want 5 to be returned. Is their such capability exists?

Also, can you please confirm that for all android devices/or other OS devices this issue is handled. as it's not possible for me to test every single android device. On some which I had tested, getting the expected result.

Hope I am making sense to you.

Thanks,
Virendra

[Elliotfehr]

Virendra,

I understand that you would like the iPhone model name, however as I have previously mentioned it is not possible to receive a more granular reponse like this since Apple does not provide it. It is only possible to determine that it is in an iPhone in this case since only the iOS version is provided and no underlying hardware information is exposed.

The information for all devices is kept up to date for all devices and if you are finding instances (other than specific iOS models), please feel free to let us know.

Thank you,

Elliot

[virendrad]

Hi Elliot,

"The information for all devices is kept up to date for all devices and if you are finding instances (other than specific iOS models), please feel free to let us know."

This is quite frustrating now. I understand you can't return expected results about iPhones, but now I am facing issues with Android devices as well. The max_image_width capability is returning incorrect value for Nexus 6 and Samsung Galaxy Note 3. For Nexus 6, it is returning 320 where the expected value is 412. And for note 3, it is returning 320px where the expected value is 360. The same is true for "max_image_height".

Elliot, I can't test every single device and then run after you to correct these values. If I have to do this then what is the use of using your API and investing $40 per month. If this is going to be like this, then I may have to look for other options.

[Elliotfehr]

Virendra,

We have just corrected this capability, which will be reflected shortly after the next release of the wurfl.xml. I have also just emailed you in regards to this topic to be able to assist you further.

Thank you,

Elliot