User agent detail

SAMSUNG-GT-I9100/100.40102
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
Browscap
6014
vendor/browscap/browscap/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-865.php
Default Browser 0.0unknown unknownunknown unknownunknownunknownunknown0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
SAMSUNG-GT-I9100 100.40102closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close SamsungGT-I9100mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
SamsungGALAXY S IIsmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close SamsungGT-I9100closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

SamsungGalaxy S IIcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24801 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
SamsungGT-I9100mobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.016 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close SamsungGT-I9100closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:55:36 | by ThaDafinser