User agent detail

iBrowser/Mini2.8 (SAMSUNG-GT-S5260/S5260XXKC4)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/mobile/browser-ibrowser.yaml
iBrowser Mini 2.8 Touchwiz Star IImobile:featureclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
iBrowser 2.8WebKit Mobile Phoneyesyes0.011 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
iBrowser 2.8close closecloseMobile Phoneyesyesclose0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
iBrowser Mini2.8closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

IBrowse close SamsungStar IIdesktop-browsercloseclose0.20101 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
IBrowse SamsungGT-S5260smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
iBrowser Mini 2.8close SamsungGT-S5260closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Samsungcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23901 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
iBrowser Mini 2.8 Touchwiz SamsungStar IImobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
IBrowse rclose SamsungGT-S5260closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 07:59:30 | by ThaDafinser