User agent detail

JBED PROFILE/MIDP-20 CONFIGURATION/CLDC-11 UNTRUSTED/10/VODAFONE/HTC_POLARIS/1251633
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close HTCPOLARISclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
JBED closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
closeJavaOS closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Polaris 1251633closeJVM VodafonePolarismobile-browseryescloseclose0.20701 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
HTCPOLARISsmartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close HTCPOLARIScloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.15501 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Polaris close closecloseclosecloseclose0.08801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Polaris 1251633 Windows Mobile HTCTouch Cruisemobile:smartyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
Java Applet close Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.017 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
Polaris 1251633close HTCPOLARIScloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 08:11:44 | by ThaDafinser