User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Java; U; Pt-br; samsung gt-e2222l) AppleWebKit/530.13 (KHTML, like Gecko) UCBrowser/8.5.0.185/83/352/UCWEB Mobile
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
Samsunggt-e2222l Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesGeneral CrawlersBot/Crawler0.072 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AppleWebKit 530.13closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Mobile Safari close mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.5WebKit Samsunggt-e2222lsmartphoneyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 5.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.5.0close Samsunggt-e2222lcloseclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.5.0.185WebKit 530.13 SamsungMobilecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.46805 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.5Gecko Samsunggt-e2222lmobile:featureyescloseclose0.01 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 8closeAndroid 4.0Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.015 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 13:39:43 | by ThaDafinser