User agent detail

MQQBrowser/Mini2.7 (SAMSUNG GT-E2222)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close SamsungGT-E2222closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
MQQBrowser Mini2.7closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

QQbrowser Mini2.7close SamsungCh@t 222mobile-browseryescloseclose0.2028 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
QQ Browser 2.7 SamsungGT-E2222smartphoneyes0 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
QQ Browser Mini 2.7close SamsungGT-E2222closeclosecloseclose0 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

QQ Browser Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.2496 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
QQ Browser Mini 2.7 SamsungCh@t 222mobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.0156 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
MQQBrowser Mini2.7close SamsungE2222closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 2016-05-10 07:51:56 | by ThaDafinser