User agent detail

JUC (Linux; U; 2.3.5; zh-cn; HTC_HD7_T9299; 480*800) UCWEB7.9.3.103/139/800
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCHD7 T9299 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 7.9WebKit Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes0.006 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
JUC closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeLinux HTCA810emobile-browseryescloseclose0.26703 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.9 GNU/Linux HTCHD7 T9299smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.9.3closeAndroid 2.3.5HTCHD7 T9299closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 7.9.3.103closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.048 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.9.3.103 Linux HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.9 Android 2.3.5HTCHD7mobile:smartyescloseclose0.023 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 2.3closeAndroid 2.3Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.013 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 13:28:54 | by ThaDafinser