User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.1; TF-MID806G Build/JOP40D[20131121.170851]) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/41.0.2272.92 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Chrome 41.0Android 4.2unknown TelefunkenTF-MID806GTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 41.0Blink Android 4.2TelefunkenTF-MID806GTabletyesyes0.028 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 41.0.2272.92closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 41.0.2272.92closeAndroid 4.2.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.26903 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 41.0Blink Android 4.2tabletyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 41.0.2272.92closeAndroid 4.2.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 41.0.2272closeAndroid 4.2.1TF-MID806Gcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.05201 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 41.0.2272.92WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 41Blink Android 4.2.1TF-MID806Gtabletyescloseclose0.10201 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 41.0.2272.92closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 42closeAndroid 4.2Tabletyesyescloseclose0.042 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 13:25:35 | by ThaDafinser