User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; de-de; GT-I9100 Build/GINGERBREAD) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Safari/533.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-000-mobiles.php
Android 4.0Android 2.3unknown SamsungGalaxy S IIMobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Android 4.0WebKit Android 2.3SamsungGalaxy S IIMobile Phoneyesyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 4.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Safari 4.0closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Safari 4.0WebKit GNU/Linux SamsungGALAXY S IIsmartphoneyes0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari 4.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari 4.0closeLinux SamsungGT-I9100closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari 4.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.05201 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
WebKit 533.1Linux SamsungGalaxy S IIcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.45304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Android Browser Webkit 533.1Android 2.3closeclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 4.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 4.0closeLinux SamsungGT-I9100Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.016 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 13:28:30 | by ThaDafinser