User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Java; U; en-us; lg-lg800g) AppleWebKit/530.13 (KHTML, like Gecko) UCBrowser/8.5.0.185/82/352/UCWEB Mobile UNTRUSTED/1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGlg800g Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesGeneral CrawlersBot/Crawler0.04901 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebKit 530.13closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Mobile Safari close GenericJ2ME Midletmobile-browseryescloseclose0.18802 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.5WebKit LG800gsmartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.5.0close LGlg800gcloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.5.0.185WebKit 530.13 LGLGlg800gcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.5Gecko LGlg800gmobile:featureyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 8closeAndroid 4.0Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 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 13:32:40 | by ThaDafinser