User agent detail

Motorola-C290 Obigo/Q04C1-1.9 MMP/2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/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 MotorolaC290closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
Motorola-C290 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
ObigoBrowser closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM MotorolaC290mobile-browseryescloseclose0.23201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo Q04C1 MotorolaC290smartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 4.1close MotorolaC290closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Obigo 04 closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15201 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Obigo Q04C1 Browser Q04C1 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23401 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 4C MotorolaC290mobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Teleca Obigo Q04C1close MotorolaC290Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.022 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Obigo Q04C1close closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:54:24 | by ThaDafinser