User agent detail

LG-GW370/V10c; Mozilla/5.0 (Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; Opera Mini/att/4.2.17086; U; en) Opera 9.50
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGGW370 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 4.2Presto 2.2JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.021 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Minicloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.50close desktop-browsercloseclose0.19702 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 4.2Presto LGGW370smartphoneyes0.01 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini attclose closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 4.2.17086close LGGW370closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini close closecloseclosecloseclose0.06401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini LGLGGW370closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 4.2 LGGW370mobile:featureyescloseclose0.017 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.50closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGGW370Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.03 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 13:28:27 | by ThaDafinser