User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/30.0.1599.101 Safari/537.36; SSL-Crawler: http://crawler.dcsec.uni-hannover.de
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_ua.yaml
SSL-Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 30.0Blink Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.046 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 30.0.1599.101closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 30.0.1599.101closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
yes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 30.0.1599.101closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
close closeclosecloseyesSSL-Crawlerclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 30.0.1599.101closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.06701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 30.0.1599.101WebKit 537.36Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 30Blink Linux desktopcloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 30.0.1599.101closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close yescloseclose0.011 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 13:26:23 | by ThaDafinser