User agent detail

SpiceM5395/MTK Release/01.01.2012 Browser/wap2.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/smartphone-3.yml
MTK / Nucleus SpiceM5395smartphone Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SpiceM5395 MTKcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
closeMRE SpiceM5395mobile-browseryescloseclose0.198 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
MTK / Nucleus SpiceM5395smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close closeclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
MRE SpiceM5395mobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close SpiceM-5395Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 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 13:26:42 | by ThaDafinser