User agent detail

LG-MG295 Obigo/WAP2.0 MIDP-2.0/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
LGMG295 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.015 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-MG295 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo WAP 2.0close LGMG295mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18502 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo WAP2 LGMG295smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 2.0close LGMG295closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo WAP2 Browser WAP2 LGLGMG295closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41104 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGMG295mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGMG295Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.021 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 13:32:18 | by ThaDafinser