User agent detail

AtomicBrowser/7.0.1 CFNetwork/672.1.13 Darwin/14.0.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-651.php
Atomic Browser 7.0iOS 7.1unknown Applegeneral Mobile DeviceMobile Deviceyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Atomic Browser 7.0WebKit iOS 7.1AppleMobile Deviceyesyes0.012 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AtomicBrowser 7.0.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Atomic Web Browser 7.0.1closeiOS mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18902 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
iOS 7.1yes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
CFNetwork 672.1.13closeiOS 7.1Applecloseclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Darwin closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
iOS 7.1mobile:smartyescloseclose0.008 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Mobile Safari 7.1closeiOS 7.1AppleiPhoneSmartphoneyesyescloseclose0.025 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 13:25:40 | by ThaDafinser