User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Vodafone/1.0/LG-BL40/V10a Browser/Obigo-Q7.3 MMS/LG-MMS-V1.0/1.2 MediaPlayer/LGPlayer/1.0 Java/ASVM/1.1 Profile/MIDP-2.1 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
LGBL40 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.05 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGBL40mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo LGBL40smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 7.3close LGBL40closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.21602 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Browser LGLGBL40closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.59306 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 7.3 LGBL40mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
SoftBank Mobile LG-BL40closeclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGBL40Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.052 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 13:37:46 | by ThaDafinser