User agent detail

FLY_E141TV_PLUS/ WAP Browser/MAUI(HTTP PGDL;HTTPS)Profile/Q03C1-2.40 ru-RU
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
vendor/piwik/device-detector/Tests/fixtures/feature_phone.yml
FlyE141TV PLUSfeature phonecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
MAUI Wap Browser JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.029 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
MAUI Wap Browser closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.053 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
FLY closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo Q 3closeMRE FlyE141TV PLUSmobile-browseryescloseclose0.21601 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
FlyE141TV PLUSfeature phoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

MAUI based WAP Browsercloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.39402 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo Q 3C MRE FlyE141TV PLUSmobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
No result found

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 08:08:37 | by ThaDafinser