User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Windows x86_64) AppleWebKit/536.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) chrome/22.0.1190.0 Safari/536.11
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-224.php
yesFake ChromeBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesFake ChromeBot/Crawler0.031 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 22.0.1190.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 22.0.1190.0closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.19602 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 22.0WebKit Windows desktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 22.0.1190.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari closeWindows closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 22.0.1190.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.06101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 22.0.1190.0WebKit 536.11Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.44004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Safari Webkit 536.11Windows 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 13:28:10 | by ThaDafinser