User agent detail

MOT-V270/0A.50.22R MIB/2.2.1 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
MotorolaV270 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 MotorolaV270Mobile Phoneyes0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-V270 0A.50.22Rcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1close MotorolaV270mobile-browseryescloseclose0.191 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaV270smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaV270closeclosecloseclose0.011 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 2.2.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini MotorolaMotorola V270closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1 MotorolaV270mobile:featureyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close MotorolaV270Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.026 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 13:35:12 | by ThaDafinser