User agent detail

WAP Browser Karbonn K52*/1.0.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
Browscap
6014
vendor/browscap/browscap/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-865.php
WAP Browser 0.0unknown unknownJAVA unknownKarbonnK52Mobile Phoneyes0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
WAP Browser JAVA KarbonnK52Mobile Phoneyes0.004 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
WAP closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

close KarbonnK52*mobile-browseryescloseclose0.21201 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
KarbonnK52*smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Karbonn Mobilescloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.25301 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
KarbonnK52*mobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
No result found

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 08:11:28 | by ThaDafinser