User agent detail

UCWEB/2.0 (Linux; U; Adr 2.3.5; en-US; Videocon_A10) U2/1.0.0 UCBrowser/8.7.0.315 U2/1.0.0 Mobile
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/smartphone-4.yml
UC Browser 8.7.0.315Android 2.3.5 VideoconA10smartphone Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 8.7U2 Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes0.015 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
UCWEB 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeLinux VideoconA10mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27803 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.7 Android 2.3VideoconA10smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.7.0closeAndroid 2.3.5closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 2.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.04801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.7.0.315 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.7Gecko Android 2.3.5VideoconA10mobile:smartyescloseclose0.033 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 8closeAndroid 2.3VideoconA10Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.014 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 13:31:08 | by ThaDafinser