User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Tizen 2.0; SAMSUNG SM-Z9005) AppleWebKit/537.3 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/2.0 Mobile Safari/537.3
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-tizen.yaml
Samsung Browser Tizen 2.0Webkit 537.3SamsungSM-Z9005 prototypemobile:smartyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Safari 2.0WebKit Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.021 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Mobile Safari 2.0closeLinux mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Mobile Safari 2.0WebKit Tizen 2.0SamsungSM-Z9005smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari 2.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari 2.0closeLinux SamsungSM-Z9005closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari 2.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.05 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
WebKit 537.3Linux Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Samsung Browser Webkit 537.3Tizen 2.0SamsungSM-Z9005 prototypemobile:smartyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 2.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 2.0closeLinux TizenFeature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.009 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 13:39:55 | by ThaDafinser