User agent detail

LG-C3310 MIC/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 LGC3310closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo JAVA LGC3310Mobile Phoneyes0.004 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.03 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-C3310 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close LGC3310mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20901 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
LGC3310smartphoneyes0.002 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close LGC3310closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.14801 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGC3310closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.22901 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGC3310mobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGC3310Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.029 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close LGC3310closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 08:02:48 | by ThaDafinser