User agent detail

MOT-A768i/R503_G_00.17.A1R MIB/2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 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
MotorolaA768i Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 MotorolaA768iMobile Phoneyes0.031 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-A768i R503closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2close MotorolaA768imobile-browseryescloseclose0.18702 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaA768ismartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaA768icloseclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 2.2close closecloseclosecloseclose0.08701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 MotorolaA768imobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close MotorolaA768iFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.033 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 13:25:16 | by ThaDafinser