User agent detail

MOT-KLGO iTunes/0E.30.16R MIB/2.2.1 Profile/MIDP-2.0 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 MotorolaKLGOclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Motorola Internet Browser 2.2 MotorolaKLGO iTunesMobile Phoneyes0.008 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
MOT-KLGO closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Motorola Internet Browser 2.2.1close Motorolamobile-browseryescloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
iTunes MotorolaKLGOsmartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaKLGOcloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15101 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

MIB 2.2.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.061 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

iTunes closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23701 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
iTunes MotorolaKLGO iTunesmobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close MotorolaFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.081 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
iTunes 0E.30.16Rclose LGcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:05:46 | by ThaDafinser