User agent detail

Alcatel-Crystal/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 ObigoInternetBrowser/Q03C
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
AlcatelCrystal Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 3.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.026 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Alcatel-Crystal 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19502 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q03C AlcatelCrystalsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo close AlcatelCrystalcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Browser closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 3C AlcatelCrystalmobile:featureyescloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q05Aclose Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.013 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 13:33:29 | by ThaDafinser