User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; ; en-NZ) AppleWebKit/527 (KHTML, like Gecko, Safari/419.3) Arora/0.8.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-539.php
Arora 0.8Win32 unknownunknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Arora 0.8WebKit Win32 Windows DesktopDesktop0.042 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 419.3closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Arora 0.8.0closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.198 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Arora 0.8WebKit Windows desktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Arora 0.8.0closeWindows closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Arora 0.8.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.113 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Arora 0.8.0WebKit 527Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.442 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Arora 0.8.0Webkit 527Windows desktopcloseclose0.008 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 8.0closeFedora Desktopcloseclose0.008 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 2016-02-13 13:25:02 | by ThaDafinser