User agent detail

UCWEB/2.0 (Linux; U; Adr 4.1.2; en-US; SHV-E210S) U2/1.0.0 UCBrowser/8.6.0.276 U2/1.0.0 Mobile
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
UC Browser 8.6Android 4.1unknown SamsungGalaxy S III LTE (Korea)Mobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 8.6U2 Android 4.1SamsungGalaxy S III LTE (Korea)Mobile Phoneyesyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
UCWEB 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeLinux SamsungSHW-M250Kmobile-browseryescloseclose0.25905 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.6 Android 4.1SamsungSHV-E210Ssmartphoneyes0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.6.0closeAndroid 4.1.2closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 2.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.06801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.6.0.276 Linux Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.46609 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.6Gecko Android 4.1.2SamsungGalaxy S IIImobile:smartyescloseclose0.05501 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 8closeAndroid 4.0Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.01 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 13:38:04 | by ThaDafinser