User agent detail

LG-Ggex=51,LG-GT505/v10a Browser/Teleca-Q7.1 MMS/LG-MMS-V1.0/1.2 MediaPlayer/LGPlayer/1.0 Java/ASVM/1.1 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 LGGgexclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Obigo Q 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.038 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Obigo Q 7.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.086 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-Ggex closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.004 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGGgex=51,LGmobile-browseryescloseclose0.21201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGGgexsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close LGGgexcloseclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.17001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo Q7.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.064 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGGgexcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23801 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 7.1 LGGgex=51,LGmobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca close LGGgexcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:01:41 | by ThaDafinser