User agent detail

Bluevibe 2.4 r3799 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; SAMSUNG SGH-J150B Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.0), SAMSUNG-SGH-J150B/1.0 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
SamsungSGH-J150B Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Openwave Mobile Browser 6.2 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Openwave Mobile Browser 6.2.3.3.c.1.102close mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19802 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 6.0Trident SamsungSGH-J150Bsmartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 6.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UP.Browser 6.2.3close SamsungSGH-J150Bcloseclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 6.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07601 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Openwave Mobile Browser 6.2.3.3.c.1.102 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Openwave 6.2 SamsungSGH-J150B Profilemobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.016 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 13:34:04 | by ThaDafinser