User agent detail

SAMSUNG-GT-C6112C/1.0 RTK-E/1.0 DF/1.0 Release/08.18.2009 Browser/NetFront3.5 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungGT-C6112C Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
SAMSUNG-GT-C6112C 1.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront 3.5closeJVM mobile-browseryescloseclose0.224 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
NetFront NetFront SamsungGT-C6112Csmartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close SamsungGT-C6112Ccloseclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
NetFront 3.5close closecloseclosecloseclose0.052 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
NetFront Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
NetFront 3.5 SamsungGT-C6112Cmobile:featureyescloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.026 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 13:35:16 | by ThaDafinser