User agent detail

LG-GT550/V11b; Mozilla/5.0 (Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; Opera Mini/att/4.2.18377; U; en-US) Opera 9.50
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-317.php
Opera Mini 4.2JAVA unknown2.2 LGEncoreMobile Phoneyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 4.2Presto 2.2JAVA LGEncoreMobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Minicloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.50close desktop-browsercloseclose0.25903 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 4.2Presto LGGT550smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini attclose closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 4.2.18377close LGGT550closeclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini close closecloseclosecloseclose0.048 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini LGLGGT550closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 4.2 LGGT550 Encoremobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.50closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGLG-GT550Feature 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 13:31:54 | by ThaDafinser