User agent detail

SAMSUNG-SGH-T340G NetFront/3.5 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1[TF355873040088354000000018083332884]
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungSGH-T340G Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
NetFront 3.5NetFront Mobile Deviceyes0.026 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-SGH-T340G closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront 3.5closeJVM SamsungSGH-T340Gmobile-browseryescloseclose0.19902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
NetFront 3.5NetFront SamsungSGH-T340Gsmartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
NetFront 3.5close SamsungSGH-T340Gcloseclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
NetFront 3.5close closecloseclosecloseclose0.04901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
NetFront Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
NetFront 3.5 SamsungSGH-T340G NetFrontmobile:featureyescloseclose0.022 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
NetFront 3.5close SamsungSGH-T340GFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.037 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 13:28:26 | by ThaDafinser