User agent detail

LENOVO-i908/(2007.03.30)S131/WAP2.0 Profile/MIDP2.0 Configuration/CLDC1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
Lenovoi908 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LENOVO-i908 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
close Lenovoi908mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18602 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Lenovoi908smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close Lenovoi908closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Lenovoi908mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close Lenovoi908Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.03 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 13:32:14 | by ThaDafinser