User agent detail

LG-MU575/V0.9 Obigo/Q05A Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/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
LGMU575 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 5.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-MU575 V0.9closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGMU575mobile-browseryescloseclose0.195 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q05A LGMU575smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 5close LGMU575closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Q05A Browser Q05A LGLGMU575closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 5A LGMU575mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q05Aclose LGMU575Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.023 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 13:33:17 | by ThaDafinser