User agent detail

SAMSUNG-SPHM540 POLARIS/60 MMP/20 PROFILE/MIDP-20 CONFIGURATION/CLDC-11
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungSPHM540 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-SPHM540 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Polaris 60closeJVM mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Polaris 60 SamsungSPHM540smartphoneyes0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close SamsungSPHM540closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Polaris 60close closecloseclosecloseclose0.16702 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Polaris 60 SamsungSPHM540 POLARISmobile:featureyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.019 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 13:32:36 | by ThaDafinser