User agent detail

MOT-280/00.00.00 MIB/2.2.1 Profile/MIDP-1.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
Motorola280 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 Motorola280Mobile Phoneyes0.024 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-280 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1close Motorola280mobile-browseryescloseclose0.21102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Motorola280smartphoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close Motorola280closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 2.2.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.04901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1 Motorola280mobile:featureyescloseclose0.016 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close Motorola280Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.013 Detail

About this comparison

The primary goal of this project is simple
I wanted to know which user agent parser is the most accurate in each part - device detection, bot detection and so on...

The secondary goal is to provide a source for all user agent parsers to improve their detection based on this results.

You can also improve this further, by suggesting ideas at ThaDafinser/UserAgentParserComparison

The comparison is based on the abstraction by ThaDafinser/UserAgentParser
Comparison created 2016-02-13 13:24:49 | by ThaDafinser