User agent detail

MOT-C 390/0BA00FR MIB/221 PROFILE/MIDP-20 CONFIGURATION/CLDC-10
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close MotorolaCclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
MOT-C closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Motorola Internet Browser 221close MotorolaC 390mobile-browseryescloseclose0.2184 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
MotorolaCsmartphoneyes0 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaCcloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.1404 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

MIB 221close closecloseclosecloseclose0.0624 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Motorola Internet Browser 221 MotorolaC 390mobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.0156 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
MIB 221close MotorolaCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:50:49 | by ThaDafinser