User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (LG-T395 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) UNTRUSTED/1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-feature.yaml
Phantom 2.0 Webkit 531LGT395mobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Phantom Browser 2.0WebKit JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.038 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebkit 531closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Phantom 2.0close LGT395mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27703 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Java LGT395smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Phantom Browser 2.0close LGT395closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.12501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
5.0WebKit 531 LGLGT395closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Phantom 2.0Webkit 531 LGT395mobile:featureyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close J2ME MidletFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.012 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 13:38:20 | by ThaDafinser