User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0(compatible; Polaris 6.2; Brew 3.1.5; U; en) 240X400 LGE LG-AX8575
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LG8575 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Polaris 6.2closeBrew 3.1.5LGAX8575mobile-browseryescloseclose0.193 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Polaris 6.2 Brew 3.1LGLGsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 4.0(compatible;close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Polaris 6.2close LG8575closeclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Netscape Navigator 4.0 LGLGAX8575closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.418 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Polaris 6.2 Brew 3.1.5LGAX8575mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close LG8575Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.048 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 13:31:34 | by ThaDafinser