User agent detail

SAMSUNG-GT-B7350/1.0 Opera/9.80 (Windows Mobile; Windows CE; Opera Mobi/ORS-75XXX; U) Presto/2,4,13 Version/10.00
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_os.yaml
Windows Mobile Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 10.00closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 10.00closeWindows GenericWindows Mobilemobile-browseryescloseclose0.18901 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mobile 10.00Presto Windows CE SamsungGT-B7350smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 10.00closeWindows CEclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 10.0closeWindows Mobile SamsungGT-B7350closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mobile 10.00closeWindows CE closecloseclosecloseclose0.23201 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 10.0Presto 2Windows Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40802 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 10.00Presto 2Windows Mobile SamsungB7350 OmniaPRO 4mobile:smartyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 10.00closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE Mobile closeWindows Mobile 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 13:37:03 | by ThaDafinser