User agent detail

LG-GT550/V09m Obigo/Q7.3 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
LGGT550 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.034 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-GT550 V09mcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGLG-GT550mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q7 LGGT550smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 7.3close LGGT550closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Q7 Browser Q7 LGLGGT550closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 7.3 LGGT550 Encoremobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGLG-GT550Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.018 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 13:40:42 | by ThaDafinser