User agent detail

JUC (Linux; U; 2.3.6; zh-cn; Aqua_Star; 320*480) UCWEB7.9.0.94/139/444
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-096.php
UC Browser 7.9Android 2.3unknown unknowngeneral Mobile PhoneMobile Phoneyesyes 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 mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27803 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.9 GNU/Linux desktop0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.9.0closeAndroid 2.3.6IntexAqua Starcloseclosecloseclose0.014 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 7.9.0.94closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.09301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.9.0.94 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.9 Android 2.3.6IntexAqua Starmobile:smartyescloseclose0.032 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 2.3closeAndroid 2.3Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.012 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 13:29:17 | by ThaDafinser