User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (BREW 3.1.5; U; en-us; Samsung; SPH_M330; POLARIS/6.1/WAP) MMP/2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Novarra-Vision/8.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungSPH Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Polaris 6.1closeJVM SamsungSPH M330mobile-browseryescloseclose0.214 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Polaris 6.1 Brew 3.1SamsungSPH M330smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 4.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Polaris 6.1closeBREW 3.1.5SamsungSPHcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Vision Mobile Browser 8.0 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.484 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Polaris 6.1 Brew 3.1.5Samsung; SPHmobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close yescloseclose0.038 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 2016-02-13 13:25:03 | by ThaDafinser