User agent detail

MOT-V330/08.18.1CR MIB/2.2.1 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
MotorolaV330 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-V330 08.18.1CRcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1close MotorolaV330mobile-browseryescloseclose0.189 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaV330smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaV330closeclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
MIB 2.2.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.061 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini MotorolaMotorola V330closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.405 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1 MotorolaV330mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close MotorolaV330Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.03601 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 13:41:35 | by ThaDafinser