User agent detail

LG600G[TFXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX] Obigo/WAP2.0 MIDP-2.0/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
LG600G Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.13801 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
LG600G closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Obigo WAP 2.0close mobile-browseryescloseclose0.193 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Obigo WAP2 LG600Gsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 2.0close LG600Gcloseclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Obigo WAP2 Browser WAP2 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Obigo WAP 2.0 mobile:featureyescloseclose0.017 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close LGLG600GFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.043 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 13:43:09 | by ThaDafinser