User agent detail

JUC (Linux; U; 2.1-update1; xx; GT-I5700; 320*480) UCWEB8.2.2.135/145/999
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/browser-uc.yaml
UC Browser 8.2Android 2.1 SamsungGalaxy Spicamobile:smartyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 8.2WebKit Android Mobile Phoneyesyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
JUC closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeLinux mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27903 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.2 GNU/Linux SamsungGALAXY Spicasmartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.2.2closeAndroid 2.1.0SamsungGT-I5700closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 8.2.2.135closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.044 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.2.2.135 Linux Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.2 Android 2.1SamsungGalaxy Spicamobile:smartyescloseclose0.05901 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 2.1closeAndroid 2.1Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.032 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 13:27:21 | by ThaDafinser