User agent detail

UCWEB/2.0 (Java; U; MIDP-2.0; xx; SAMSUNG-GT-S3850) U2/1.0.0 UCBrowser/9.5.0.449 U2/1.0.0 Mobile UNTRUSTED/1.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/browser-uc.yaml
UC Browser 9.5Touchwiz Gecko SamsungCorby IImobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 9.5U2 JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.013 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
UCWEB 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser close GenericJ2ME Midletmobile-browseryescloseclose0.19 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 9.5 SamsungGT-S3850smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 9.5.0close SamsungGT-S3850closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 2.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.053 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 9.5.0.449 SamsungMobilecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.362 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 9.5Gecko Touchwiz SamsungCorby IImobile:featureyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
UCBrowser Java Applet 9close SamsungGT-S3850Feature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.02901 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 13:41:05 | by ThaDafinser