User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (LG-T385b-Bouygues 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)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGT385b Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Phantom Browser 2.0WebKit JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.045 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebkit 531closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Phantom 2.0close LGT385bmobile-browseryescloseclose0.20002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Java LGT385bsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Phantom Browser 2.0close LGT385bcloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.11501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
5.0WebKit 531 LGLGT385bcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Phantom 2.0Webkit 531 LGT385bmobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.027 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 13:40:17 | by ThaDafinser