User agent detail

LG-KP501 Teleca/WAP2.0 MIDP-2.0/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close LGKP501closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.0156 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.0312 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-KP501 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGKP501mobile-browseryescloseclose0.2184 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGKP501smartphoneyes0 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close LGKP501closeclosecloseclose0.0156 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.156 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.0936 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGKP501closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.2184 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGKP501mobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGKP501Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.0312 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca WAP2.0close LGKP501closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 2016-05-10 07:50:27 | by ThaDafinser