User agent detail

OneBrowser/3.1 (SAMSUNG-GT-E2250)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close SamsungGT-E2250closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
OneBrowser 3.1WebKit Mobile Phoneyesyes0.007 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
OneBrowser 3.1close closecloseMobile Phoneyesyesclose0.009 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
OneBrowser 3.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

OneBrowser 3.1close SamsungUticamobile-browseryescloseclose0.21701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
ONE Browser 3.1WebKit SamsungGT-E2250smartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
ONE Browser 3.1close SamsungGT-E2250closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

OneBrowser 3.1 Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23801 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
OneBrowser 3.1 SamsungUticamobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
OneBrowser 3.1close SamsungGT-E2250closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:56:11 | by ThaDafinser