User agent detail

SAMSUNG-GT-E3300I Opera/9.80 (J2ME/MIDP; Opera Mini/4.4.33546/30.3316; U; en) Presto/2.8.119 Version/11.10
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungGT-E3300I Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 4.4Presto 2.2JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.042 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 11.10closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mini 4.4.33546closeJVM SamsungGT-E3300Imobile-browseryescloseclose0.19302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 4.4Presto SamsungGT-E3300Ismartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini 4.4.33546close closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 4.4.33546close SamsungGT-E3300Icloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini 4.4.33546close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini 4.4.33546Presto 2.8.119 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 4.4Presto 2.8.119 SamsungGT-E3300Imobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 11.10closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera Mini 4.4close SamsungGT-E3300IFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.029 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 13:34:39 | by ThaDafinser