User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.0; ) Opera/UC Browser7.8.0.95/69/351, SAMSUNG-GT-C3222/C3222DDJL3 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 UP.Browser/6.2.3.3.c.1.102 (GUI) MMP/2.0 Untrusted/1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungGT-C3222 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Openwave Mobile Browser 6.2 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.077 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera UCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Openwave Mobile Browser 6.2.3.3.c.1.102close mobile-browseryescloseclose0.189 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.8 SamsungGT-C3222smartphoneyes0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera UCclose closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.8.0close SamsungGT-C3222closeclosecloseclose0.014 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera close closecloseclosecloseclose0.047 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.8.0.95 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.408 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Openwave 6.2 SamsungCh@t 322mobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 4.0closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.027 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 13:29:51 | by ThaDafinser