User agent detail

Mozilla/6.0 (iPad; CPU iPad OS 8_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/536.26 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/8.0 Mobile/10A5376e Safari/8536.25
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-539.php
yesFake SafariBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesFake SafariBot/Crawler0.006 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 8.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Mobile Safari 8.0closeiOS mobile-browseryescloseclose0.188 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Mobile Safari 8.0WebKit iOS 8.0AppleiPadtabletyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari 8.0closeOS X closeiPadcloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Mobile Safari 8.0closeiOS 8.0AppleiPadcloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari 8.0closeiPhone OS 8.0closecloseclosecloseclose0.109 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mobile Safari 8.0WebKit 536.26iOS 8.0AppleiPadcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.402 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Safari Webkit 536.26iOS 8.0AppleiPadtabletyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 8.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
closeLinux Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.012 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 13:27:44 | by ThaDafinser