User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (SCH-S559/S559DL12;U;REX/3.0;BREW/3.1.5;Profile/MIDP-2.1 Configuration/CLDC-1.1;240*320;CTC/2.0) POLARIS/6.15.WEB
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-brew.yaml
Polaris 6.15Brew 3.1.5 SamsungSCH-S559mobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Polaris 6.15.closeJVM mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Polaris 6.15 Brew 3.1SiemensS55smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Polaris 6.15closeBREW 3.1.5closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Polaris 6.15close closecloseclosecloseclose0.05101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
5.0 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.43804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Polaris 6.15 Brew 3.1.5SamsungSCH-S559mobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.011 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 13:29:02 | by ThaDafinser