User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.0.4; xx; KFJWI Build/IMM76D) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Silk/3.41 like Chrome/37.0.2026.117 Safari/537.36

Detected by 8 of 8 providers
As bot detected by 0 of 7

GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeActions
BrowscapPhp
6011
Silk 3.41Blink Android 4.0AmazonKindleEbook Readeryesyes Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Silk 3.41closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.1
Chrome 37.0Blink Android 4.0AmazonKindle Fire HD 8.9" WiFitabletyes Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 37.0.2026.117closeAndroid 4.0.4closecloseyesclosecloseclose Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Amazon Silk 3.41closeAndroid 4.0.4AmazonKindle Fire HD 8.9" WiFicloseclosecloseclose Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.9
Silk 3.41Blink 537.36FireOS AmazonKindle Fire HD 8.9"tabletyescloseclose Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 37.0.2026.117closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Amazon Silk Browser 2.2closeAndroid 4.0AmazonKFJWITabletyesyescloseclose 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 2016-01-26 16:38:29 | by ThaDafinser