User agent detail

LG-KS660_CMCC Release/01.02.2009 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 LGKS660closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.017 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.047 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-KS660 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGKS660mobile-browseryescloseclose0.21601 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGKS660smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close LGKS660closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.089 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGKS660closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23901 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo WAP 2.0 LGKS660mobile:featureyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGKS660Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.022 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca WAP2.0close LGKS660closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:05:24 | by ThaDafinser