User agent detail

LG-GS390/V10k Obigo/Q7.3 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/browser-obigo.yaml
Obigo Q 7.3 LGGS390mobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.024 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-GS390 V10kcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGGS390mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q7 LGGS390smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 7.3close LGGS390closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Q7 Browser Q7 LGLGGS390closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 7.3 LGGS390mobile:featureyescloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q7.3close LGGS390Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.014 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 13:27:16 | by ThaDafinser