User agent detail

LG-G262 MIC/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 LGG262closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo JAVA LGG262Mobile Phoneyes0 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.0156 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-G262 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close LGG262mobile-browseryescloseclose0.2184 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
LGG262smartphoneyes0.0156 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close LGG262closeclosecloseclose0 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.1404 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGG262closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.2496 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGG262mobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGG262Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.0342 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close LGG262closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:52:41 | by ThaDafinser