User agent detail

JUC (DFH3;U; 4.0.3; zh-cn; HTC_Sensation_XL_with_Beats_Audio_X315e; 480*800) UCWEB7.9.0.94/139/352
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCSensation XL with Beats_Audio_X315e Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
JUC closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser close mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27003 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 7.9 HTCSensation XL with Beats Audio X315esmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 7.9.0closeAndroid 4.0.3HTCSensation XL with Beats_Audio_X315ecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 7.9.0.94close closecloseclosecloseclose0.06001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 7.9.0.94 HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 7.9Gecko HTCSensation XL with Beats Audio X315emobile:featureyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.014 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 13:38:20 | by ThaDafinser