User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (BREW; Opera Mini/5.1/27.2338; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 240X400 LG VN27130SCH-U485
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGVN27130SCH Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 5.1Presto 2.2Brew 2.0Mobile Deviceyes0.012 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 9.80closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mini 5.1close LGVN270mobile-browseryescloseclose0.215 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 5.1Presto Brew LGVN27130SCHsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini 5.1close closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 5.1closeBREW LGVN27130SCHcloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini 5.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.213 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini 5.1Presto 2.8.119 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.406 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 5.1Presto 2.8.119Brew SamsungIntensity IIImobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.80closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera Mini 5.1close LGVN270Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.014 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 13:30:50 | by ThaDafinser