User agent detail

LG-HB620T/v10a Browser/Obigo-Q05A/3.12 MMS/LG-MMS-V1.0/1.2 Java/ASVM/1.1 Profile/MIDP-2.1 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
LGHB620T Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 5.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.022 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-HB620T v10acloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGHB620Tmobile-browseryescloseclose0.187 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo LGHB620Tsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 5close LGHB620Tcloseclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.049 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Browser LGLGHB620Tcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.398 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 5A LGHB620Tmobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGHB620TFeature 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 13:33:26 | by ThaDafinser