User agent detail

UCWEB/2.0(Linux; U; Opera Mini/7.1.32052/30.3697; en-us; GT-S5670 Build/GINGERBREAD) U2/1.0.0 UCBrowser/9.4.1.362 Mobile
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-317.php
UC Browser 9.4Android 4.0unknown SamsungGalaxy FitMobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 9.4U2 Android 4.0SamsungGalaxy FitMobile Phoneyesyes0.008 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Minicloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeLinux mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26003 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 7.1Presto GNU/Linux SamsungGT-S5670smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini 7.1.32052closeLinux closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 7.1.32052closeLinux SamsungGT-S5670closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini 7.1.32052closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.06401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 9.4.1.362 Linux Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 9.4Gecko Android 2.3SamsungGalaxy Fitmobile:smartyescloseclose0.03 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 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 13:42:38 | by ThaDafinser