User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (BREW; Opera Mini/5.0/27.2338; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 240X320 LG VN250g SCH-U485
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGVN250g Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 5.0Presto 2.2Brew 2.0Mobile Deviceyes0.013 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 9.80closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mini 5.0close LGVN270mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20198 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 5.0Presto Brew LGVN250gsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini 5.0close closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 5.0closeBREW LGVN250gcloseclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.20898 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini 5.0Presto 2.8.119 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40496 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 5.0Presto 2.8.119Brew SamsungIntensity IIImobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.80closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera Mini 5.1close LGVN270Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.015 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 13:34:45 | by ThaDafinser