User agent detail

MOT-E 398/0BD223R MIB/221 PROFILE/MIDP-20 CONFIGURATION/CLDC-10
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
MotorolaE Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-E closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 221close MotorolaE398mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20112 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaEsmartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaEcloseclosecloseclose0.011 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 221close closecloseclosecloseclose0.17611 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 221 MotorolaE 398mobile:featureyescloseclose0.019 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close MotorolaE398Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.029 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 13:37:09 | by ThaDafinser