User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (LG-C199 AppleWebkit/531 Browser/Phantom/V2.0 Widget/LGMW/3.0 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)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-500.php
Phantom Browser 2.0JAVA unknownunknown LGC199Mobile Phoneyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Phantom Browser 2.0WebKit JAVA LGC199Mobile Phoneyes0.17498 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebkit 531closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Phantom 2.0close LGC199mobile-browseryescloseclose0.194 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Java LGC199smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Phantom Browser 2.0close LGC199closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.054 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
5.0WebKit 531 LGLGC199closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.413 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Phantom 2.0Webkit 531 LGC199mobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGC199Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.023 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 13:35:15 | by ThaDafinser