User agent detail

LG_TB200_CMCC A2000pH/2.32.00 Release/9.14.2009 Browser/Teleca/Q7.1 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/os-feature.yaml
Obigo Q 7.1 TB200mobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Obigo Q 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.023 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Obigo Q 7.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.05 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGTB200mobile-browseryescloseclose0.22001 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGsmartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15301 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.08001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 7.1 LGTB200mobile:featureyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.019 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca Q7.1close LGcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:58:18 | by ThaDafinser