User agent detail

SAMSUNG-SGH-T629R/T629UVFL2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 NetFront/3.2
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungSGH-T629R Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
NetFront 3.2NetFront Mobile Deviceyes0.039 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-SGH-T629R T629UVFL2closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront 3.2close SamsungSGH T629mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
NetFront 3.2NetFront SamsungSGH-T629Rsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
NetFront 3.2close SamsungSGH-T629Rcloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
NetFront 3.2close closecloseclosecloseclose0.06101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
NetFront Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
NetFront 3.2 SamsungSGH-T629Rmobile:featureyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
NetFront 3.2close SamsungSGH T629Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.03 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 13:34:17 | by ThaDafinser