User agent detail

LG-GM630 Browser/Teleca-Q7.1 MMS/LG-MMS-V1.0/1.2 Java/ASVM/1.1 Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/browser-obigo.yaml
Obigo Q 7.1 GM630mobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Obigo Q 7.0 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.012 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Obigo Q 7.0closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.031 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
LG-GM630 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM LGGM630mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo LGGM630smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close LGGM630closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15301 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo Q7.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.074 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

LGLGGM630closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24201 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 7.1 LGGM630mobile:featureyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close LGGM630Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.02 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca close LGGM630closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:06:04 | by ThaDafinser