User agent detail

MOT-V180/0B.D1.09R MIB/2.2.1 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
MotorolaV180 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 MotorolaV180Mobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-V180 0B.D1.09Rcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1close Motorolav180mobile-browseryescloseclose0.21102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaV180smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaV180closeclosecloseclose0.019 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 2.2.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.05 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini MotorolaMotorola V180closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1 MotorolaV180mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close Motorolav180Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.031 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 13:36:05 | by ThaDafinser