User agent detail

LG-TU750/V10a Teleca/Q7.0 Profile/MIDP-2.1 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 LGTU750closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Obigo Q 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.021 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Obigo Q 7.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.044 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-TU750 V10acloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGTU750mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20901 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGTU750smartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close LGTU750closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15201 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.18801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGTU750closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23901 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 7.0 LGTU750mobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGTU750Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.02 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca Q7.0close LGTU750closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:00:09 | by ThaDafinser