User agent detail

LG-GT550/V09m Obigo/Q7.3 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 LGGT550closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo 7.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.042 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-GT550 V09mcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
ObigoBrowser closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGLG-GT550mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo Q7 LGGT550smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Obigo 7.3close LGGT550closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Obigo 7.3 closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.16601 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Obigo Q7 Browser Q7 LGLGGT550closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23401 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 7.3 LGGT550 Encoremobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Teleca Obigo Q7.3close LGLG-GT550Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.02 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Obigo Q7.3close LGGT550closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:02:31 | by ThaDafinser