User agent detail

PhilipsX520/1.0 NXP5210/DV9 Release/9.01.2008 Browser/Obigo2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
PhilipsX520 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.02801 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
PhilipsX520 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM PhilipsX520mobile-browseryescloseclose0.202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo PhilipsX520smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 2.0close PhilipsX520closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo Browser closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.507 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo 2.0 PhilipsX520mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close PhilipsX520Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.02001 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 13:41:15 | by ThaDafinser