User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; U; en-US) Gecko/20081217 Vision-Browser/8.1 301x200 LG VN530
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGVN530 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
closeBrew LGOctanemobile-browseryescloseclose0.188 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
GNU/Linux LGVN530smartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
closeLinux LGVN530closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Mozilla closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.047 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mozilla 5.0Gecko 20081217Linux LGLG VN530closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Gecko Brew LGOctanemobile:featureyescloseclose0.009 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
closeLinux LGVN530Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.032 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 13:27:59 | by ThaDafinser