User agent detail

SAMSUNG-GT-M5650U/1.0 SHP/VPP/R5 Jasmine/1.0 Qtv5.3 SMM-MMS/1.2.0 profile/MIDP-2.1 configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungGT-M5650U Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Jasmine 1.0NetFront JAVA SamsungMobile Deviceyes0.024 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-GT-M5650U 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Jasmine 1.0close SamsungGT-M5650Umobile-browseryescloseclose0.19102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Jasmine 1.0 SamsungGT-M5650Usmartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Jasmine 1.0close SamsungGT-M5650Ucloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Jasmine 1.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Dolfin 1.0 SamsungGT-M5650Umobile:featureyescloseclose0.023 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close SamsungGT-M5650UFeature 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 13:30:28 | by ThaDafinser