User agent detail

MOT-V3i_iTunes/08.22.09R MIB/BER2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 EGE/1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close MotorolaV3i_iTunesclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 MotorolaV3iMobile Phoneyes0.006 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
MOT-V3i closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

iTunes 08.22.09close MotorolaV3imobile-browseryescloseclose0.23701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
MotorolaV3ismartphoneyes0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
iTunes 8.22.9close MotorolaV3i_iTunescloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

MIB close closecloseclosecloseclose0.086 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Opera Mini 8.22.09R MotorolaMotorola V3icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24001 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
iTunes 08.22.09 MotorolaV3imobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close MotorolaRAZR V3iFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.023 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
iTunes 08.22.09Rclose MotorolaV3icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:55:28 | by ThaDafinser