User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (Vodafone/1.0/LG-GU280/v10a Browser/Obigo-Q7.3 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
LGGU280 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.05 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM mobile-browseryescloseclose0.22202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo LGGU280smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 4.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 7.3close LGGU280closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Browser LGLGGU280closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 7.3 LGGU280mobile:featureyescloseclose0.016 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
SoftBank Mobile LG-GU280closeclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q05Aclose Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.04201 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 13:25:20 | by ThaDafinser