User agent detail

UCWEB/2.0 (Linux; U; Adr 2.3.6; en-US; Iris_349+) U2/1.0.0 UCBrowser/8.7.0.315 U2/1.0.0 Mobile
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/smartphone-1.yml
UC Browser 8.7.0.315Android 2.3.6 LavaIris 349+smartphone Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
UC Browser 8.7U2 Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
UCWEB 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
UC Browser closeLinux LavaIris 349mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
UC Browser 8.7 Android 2.3LavaIris 349+smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
UC Browser 8.7.0closeAndroid 2.3.6LavaIris 349+closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
UC Browser 2.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.052 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
UC Browser 8.7.0.315 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.403 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
UC Browser 8.7Gecko Android 2.3.6LavaIris 349+mobile:smartyescloseclose0.019 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
UC Browser 8closeAndroid 2.3LavaIris 349+Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.018 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 13:43:06 | by ThaDafinser