User agent detail

samsung-gt-e2152/UC Browser7.2.2.51/70/400, SAMSUNG-GT-E2152/E2152XXJH3 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 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
Samsunggt-e2152 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Samsung JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.038 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
samsung-gt-e2152 UCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser 7.2.2.51close SamsungGT-E2152 Duosmobile-browseryescloseclose0.19402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.2 SamsungE2152feature phoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.2.2close Samsunggt-e2152closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.2.2.51 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.2Gecko SamsungGT-E2152 Duosmobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l 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 13:34:27 | by ThaDafinser