User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (LG-T530-Orange/V10b AppleWebkit/531 Browser/Phantom/V2.0 Widget/LGMW/3.0 MMS/LG-MMS-V1.0/1.2 Java/ASVM/1.1 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGT530 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Phantom Browser 2.0WebKit JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.10701 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebkit 531closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Phantom 2.0close LGT530mobile-browseryescloseclose0.196 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Java LGT530smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Phantom Browser 2.0close LGT530closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.064 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
5.0WebKit 531 LGLGT530closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.418 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Phantom 2.0Webkit 531 LGT530mobile:featureyescloseclose0.017 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGT505Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.06601 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 13:25:06 | by ThaDafinser