User agent detail

MOT-MOTORAZRV82GB_CMCC/1.0 LinuxOS/2.6.10 Release/08.30.2007 Browser/Opera8.50 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Software/R601_G_80.54.01R
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
MotorolaMOTORAZRV82GB_CMCC Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MOT-MOTORAZRV82GB closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 8.50closeLinux MotorolaMOTORAZRV82GBmobile-browseryescloseclose0.195 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MotorolaMOTORAZRV82GBsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera MIDP-2.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
closeLinux MotorolaMOTORAZRV82GB_CMCCcloseclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 8.50closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.05 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Linux DROID RAZRcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.428 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 8.50 Linux MotorolaMOTORAZRV82GBmobile:featureyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet closeLinux MotorolaV8Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 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 13:43:11 | by ThaDafinser