User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Tizen 2.2.1.3; SAMSUNG SM-R750) AppleWebKit/538.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/2.2.1.3 Mobile Safari/538.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/watch/os-tizen.yaml
Tizen 2.2.1.3Webkit 538.1SamsungGear Swatchyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Samsung WebView 2.2WebKit Tizen 2.2Mobile Phoneyesyes0.036 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 2.2.1.3closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Mobile Safari 2.2.1.3closeLinux mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Mobile Safari 2.2WebKit Tizen 2.2SamsungSM-R750smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari 2.2.1.3closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari 2.2.1closeLinux SamsungSM-R750closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari 2.2.1.3closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.046 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
WebKit 538.1Linux Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Webkit 538.1Tizen 2.2.1.3SamsungGear Swatchyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 2.2.1.3closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 2.2closeLinux TizenFeature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.012 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 13:28:07 | by ThaDafinser