User agent detail

LG-KP270V/V10g Teleca/WAP2.0 MIDP-2.0/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 LGKP270Vclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.017 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.043 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-KP270V V10gcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGKP270mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20801 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGKP270Vsmartphoneyes0.002 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close LGKP270Vcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.17101 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.09101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGKP270Vcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.25001 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGKP270Vmobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGKP270vFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.024 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca WAP2.0close LGKP270Vcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:01:31 | by ThaDafinser