User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Java; U; es-la; samsung-sgh-a597) UCBrowser8.4.0.159/70/352/UCWEB Mobile 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
Samsungsgh-a597 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesGeneral CrawlersBot/Crawler0.10599 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser close GenericJ2ME Midletmobile-browseryescloseclose0.20008 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.4 Samsungsgh-a597smartphoneyes0.014 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.4.0close Samsungsgh-a597closeclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser close closecloseclosecloseclose0.08604 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.4.0.159 SamsungMobilecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41917 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.4Gecko Touchwiz SamsungEternity IImobile:featureyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 8closeAndroid 4.0Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.02 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 13:35:35 | by ThaDafinser