User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.1.2; Lenovo A820t Build/JZO54K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/28.0.1500.45 Mobile Safari/537.36 OPR/15.0.1162.59192
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LenovoA820t Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 15.0Blink Android 4.1Mobile Phoneyesyes0.09001 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 15.0.1162.59192closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 15.0.1162.59192closeAndroid 4.1.2LenovoA820mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26603 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mobile 15.0Blink Android 4.1LenovoA820tsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 15.0.1162.59192closeAndroid 4.1.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 15.0.1162closeAndroid 4.1.2LenovoA820tcloseclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.1.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.07001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 15.0.1162.59192WebKit 537.36Android 4.1.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 15.0Blink Android 4.1.2LenovoA820mobile:smartyescloseclose0.036 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 15.0.1162.59192closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 15closeAndroid 4.1LenovoA820Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.08001 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 13:25:41 | by ThaDafinser