User agent detail

SAMSUNG-SGH-E250/1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 UP.Browser/6.2.3.3.c.1.101 (GUI) MMP/2.0 (compatible; Googlebot-Mobile/2.1; +http://www.google.com/bot.html)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-077.php
yesGoogle Bot MobileBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesGoogle Bot MobileBot/Crawler0.008 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-SGH-E250 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
close closeyesGooglebot-Mobile/2.1close0.19202 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
yesGooglebotSearch bot0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
close closeclosecloseyesGooglebot-Mobileclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
close closeclosecloseclosecloseyesGooglebotCrawler0.049 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Googlebot Mobile 2.1 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
closeyesGooglebot Mobileclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closecloseclosecloseclosecloseyesGooglebot Mobileclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close SamsungSGH E250iFeature 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 13:34:07 | by ThaDafinser