User agent detail

Motorola-ic502 Obigo/Q04C1-1.9 MMP/2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 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
Motorolaic502 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Motorola-ic502 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM Motorolaic502mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18702 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q04C1 Motorolaic502smartphoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 4.1close Motorolaic502closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Q04C1 Browser Q04C1 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 4C MotorolaIC502mobile:featureyescloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q04C1close Motorolaic502Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.027 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 13:26:19 | by ThaDafinser