User agent detail

LG-GW525/V100 Obigo/WAP2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 UNTRUSTED/1.0 Bluevibe 3.0 r3912 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; LG-GW525/V100 Obigo/WAP2.0 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
LGGW525 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.03101 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo closeJVM GenericJ2ME Midletmobile-browseryescloseclose0.19 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 6.0Trident LGGW525smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 2.0close LGGW525closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 6.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.05 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo WAP2 Browser WAP2 LGLGGW525closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.432 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGGW525mobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGGW525Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.02701 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 13:41:18 | by ThaDafinser