User agent detail

Mozilla/4.1 (compatible; Teleca Q7; BMP 1.0.1; U; en) 240X400 LG-AN510
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGAN510 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo Q 7closeBrew MP 1.0.1LGAN510mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Brew 1.0LGAN510smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 4.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser closeBrew MP 1.0.1LGAN510closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Netscape Navigator 4.1 LGLGAN510closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 7 Brew MP 1.0.1LGAN510mobile:featureyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close LGAN510Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.027 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 13:28:46 | by ThaDafinser