User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-821.php
Safari 0.0Linux unknownunknown unknownLinux DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Safari WebKit Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.022 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 537.36closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Safari 537.36closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.18602 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Safari WebKit GNU/Linux desktop0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.017 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.07501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
WebKit 537.36Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Webkit 537.36Linux desktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
No result found

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