User agent detail

SAMSUNG-GT-C3630/1.0 SHP/VPP/R5 NetFront/3.4 Nextreaming SMM-MMS/1.2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungGT-C3630 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
NetFront 3.4NetFront Mobile Deviceyes0.05201 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-GT-C3630 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront 3.4closeJVM SamsungGT-C3630mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
NetFront 3.4NetFront SamsungGT-C3630smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
NetFront 3.4close SamsungGT-C3630closeclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
NetFront 3.4close closecloseclosecloseclose0.08501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
NetFront Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41104 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
NetFront 3.4 SamsungGT-C3630mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
NetFront 3.4close SamsungGT-C3630Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.041 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 13:25:40 | by ThaDafinser