User agent detail

BIRD S230_CMCC/1.00 Nucleus RTOS/V1.11.19 MTK6223/07A Release/07.28.2007 Browser/Teleca
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close BirdS230closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
BIRD closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
UCBrowser close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo closeJVM BirdS230mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20601 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Obigo MTK / Nucleus BirdS230 CMCCfeature phoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
Teleca Browser close BirdS230closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

Teleca-Obigo close closecloseclosecloseclose0.065 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo BirdS230mobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close BirdS230Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.019 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Teleca close closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 07:59:01 | by ThaDafinser