User agent detail

LG-T325/V100 Obigo/Q7.3 MMS/LG-MMS-V1.1/1.2 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
LGT325 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.021 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG-T325 V100closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM LGLG-T325mobile-browseryescloseclose0.186 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo Q7 LGT325smartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 7.3close LGT325closeclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesJavaCrawler0.055 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Q7 Browser Q7 LGLGT325closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.406 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo Q 7.3 LGT325mobile:featureyescloseclose0.014 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Teleca Obigo Q7.3close LGLG-T325Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.024 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 13:41:04 | by ThaDafinser