User agent detail

MOT-L6w/0A.65.07R MIB/2.2.1 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
MotorolaL6w Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-L6w 0A.65.07Rcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1close Motorolamobile-browseryescloseclose0.182 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaL6wsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaL6wcloseclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 2.2.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.116 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1 MotorolaL6wmobile:featureyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close MotorolaFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.016 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 13:27:41 | by ThaDafinser