User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.0; Trident/4.0; Avant Browser; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30618; InfoPath.1)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-184.php
Avant 0.0WinVista 6.04.0 unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Avant Trident 4.0WinVista 6.0Windows DesktopDesktop0.02 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 7.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Avant Browser closeWindows 6.0desktop-browsercloseclose0.199 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Avant Browser Trident Windows Vistadesktop0.015 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 7.0closeWindows Vistaclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Avant 1closeWindows Vista closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Avant Browser closeWindows Vista closecloseclosecloseclose0.113 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Avant Browser Trident 4.0Windows Windows NT 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.364 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Avant Browser Trident 4.0Windows Vistadesktopcloseclose0.028 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 7.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE 7.0closeWindows XPDesktopcloseclose0.012 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 13:25:05 | by ThaDafinser