User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Polaris 6.2; Brew 3.1.5; en)/240X320 Samsung sam-r640
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
Samsungsam-r640 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Polaris 6.2closeBrew 3.1.5Samsungsam-r640mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19806 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Polaris 6.2 Brew 3.1Samsungsam-r640smartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 4.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Polaris 6.2close Samsungsam-r640closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Netscape Navigator 4.0 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40612 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Polaris 6.2 Brew 3.1.5Samsungsam-r640mobile:featureyescloseclose0.01 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close SamsungR631Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.024 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 13:37:34 | by ThaDafinser