User agent detail

LG-G5300i/JM AU/4.10 Profile/MIDP-1.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close LGG5300iclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/browser-au.yaml
AU 4.10 G5300imobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
AU 4.1 Brew 2.0LGG5300iMobile Phoneyes0.008 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-G5300i JMcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close LGG5300imobile-browseryescloseclose0.21201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
LGG5300ismartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close LGG5300icloseclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.14901 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGG5300icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23601 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
AU 4.10 LGG5300imobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGG5300iFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.024 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close LGG5300icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:57:28 | by ThaDafinser