User agent detail

LG-KG200j/V01 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
LGKG200j Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.019 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-KG200j V01closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo WAP 2.0close LGKG200jmobile-browseryescloseclose0.18902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo WAP2 LGKG200jsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 2.0close LGKG200jcloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo WAP2 Browser WAP2 LGLGKG200jcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGKG200jmobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGKG200jFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.034 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 13:34:33 | by ThaDafinser