User agent detail

LG-S5100 MIC
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGS5100 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-S5100 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
close LGS5100mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
LGS5100smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close LGS5100closeclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
LGLGS5100closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
LGS5100mobile:featureyescloseclose0.016 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close LGS5100 MICFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.05401 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 13:25:37 | by ThaDafinser