User agent detail

LG-MU515 Obigo/Q05A 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
LGMU515 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 5.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.022 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-MU515 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGMU515mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q05A LGMU515smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 5close LGMU515closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Q05A Browser Q05A LGLGMU515closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 5A LGMU515mobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q05Aclose LGMU515Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.04201 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 13:30:19 | by ThaDafinser