Messy devicelist for Apple devices

[Zandor300]

The current devicelist for Apple devices is a bit messy, with different naming schemes for different devices. Some devices are separated by whether they have cellular or not and others aren't.

I think this could be cleaned up a bit by going through all devices and correcting the naming scheme. In this case, I would suggest the naming scheme that I used in the PR description. This is the naming scheme used by Apple:

• iPad (10th generation)
• iPad Pro (11-inch) (4th generation)
• iPad Pro (12.9-inch) (6th generation)

Additionally, I think the cellular specification should be dropped from the devicelist and this should be its own metric that Countly keeps track of. Countly already keeps track of the carrier the user is using anyway.

I would volunteer to do this (cleaning up devicelist), but maybe renaming previously added devices is discouraged? What do you think?

[ar2rsawseen]

Hello
I think the main problem, is that we actually need different names for different models.
If we use the same name, then when you break down data you would see different percentages for the same name (because underneath it breaks down data by the model, not the beautified name). That is why we tried to keep cellular specifications, to have at least some way to distinguish them visually

[Zandor300]

@ar2rsawseen

I see. Personally when viewing the data generated from my iOS app (for this example), I don't care which version of the device the user is using. I would prefer to have all users of a device grouped. I think that would give a more accurate picture of what devices the user is using.

I use Countly mainly to look at which iOS versions and devices users are using so I can make a descision on whether to drop support for old iOS versions. iPhone 8 for example I have 2 versions showing using my app. I would prefer to have only 1 iPhone 8 entry with all users using any version of iPhone 8.

[ar2rsawseen]

I understand that, and it would work for the community version
but for Enterprise one with data granularity, it is not possible to group that information in such a way, by display name, unfortunately.
so that is why we need separate names here