User agent detail

Samsung-SPHA680 AU-MIC-A680/2.0 MMP/2.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close SamsungSPHA680closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Teleca-Obigo JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.023 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Teleca-Obigo closeJAVA closecloseMobile Phoneyesclose0.052 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
Samsung-SPHA680 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Obigo 2.0closeJVM SamsungVM-A680 (SPH-A680)mobile-browseryescloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
SamsungSPHA680smartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close SamsungSPHA680closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Obigo SamsungSPHA680mobile:featureyescloseclose0.009 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close SamsungVM-A680 (SPH-A680)Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.024 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close SamsungSPHA680closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 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 08:05:21 | by ThaDafinser