User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; Lenovo A316i Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/40.0.2214.109 Mobile Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-732.php
Chrome 40.0Android 4.2unknown LenovoA316iMobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 40.0Blink Android 4.2LenovoA316iMobile Phoneyesyes0.035 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.109closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome Mobile 40.0.2214.109closeAndroid 4.2.2LenovoA316imobile-browseryescloseclose0.254 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome Mobile 40.0Blink Android 4.2LenovoA316ismartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.109closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome Mobile 40.0.2214closeAndroid 4.2.2LenovoA316icloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.123 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 40.0.2214.109WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.414 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 40Blink Android 4.2.2LenovoA316mobile:smartyescloseclose0.025 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.109closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 37closeAndroid 4.2LenovoA316iSmartphoneyesyescloseclose0.037 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 13:27:38 | by ThaDafinser