User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.6; en-US; Iris 349+ Build/MocorDroid2.3.5) AppleWebKit/534.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) UCBrowser/9.0.1.275 U3/0.8.0 Mobile Safari/534.31
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LavaIris 349+ Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 9.0U3 Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes0.17402 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Android Browser 534.31closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser 9.0.1.275closeAndroid 2.3.6LavaIris 349+mobile-browseryescloseclose0.25703 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 9.0WebKit MocorDroid 2.3LavaIris 349+smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Navigator closeAndroid 2.3.6closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 9.0.1closeAndroid 2.3.6LavaIris 349+closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Iris 349closeAndroid 2.3.6closecloseclosecloseclose0.08301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 9.0.1.275WebKit 534.31Android 2.3.6closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41104 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 9.0Webkit 534.31Android 2.3.6LavaIris 349+mobile:smartyescloseclose0.027 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 9closeAndroid 2.3LavaIris 349+Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.037 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 13:26:26 | by ThaDafinser