User agent detail

Samsung-SPHM540BST Polaris/6.0 MMP/2.0 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
SamsungSPHM540BST Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Polaris 6.0 Mobile Deviceyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Samsung-SPHM540BST closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Polaris 6.0closeJVM SamsungSPH-M540mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20804 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Polaris 6.0 SamsungSPHM540BSTsmartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Polaris 6.0close SamsungSPHM540BSTcloseclosecloseclose0.013 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Polaris 6.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.11002 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
No result found
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Polaris 6.0 SamsungSPHM540BST Polarismobile:featureyescloseclose0.014 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close SamsungSPH-M540Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.039 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 13:37:57 | by ThaDafinser