User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; POV_TAB-PR945 Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/29.0.1547.72 Safari/537.36 OPR/16.0.1212.63780
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
POVTAB-PR945 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 16.0Blink Android 4.2Mobile Phoneyesyes0.026 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 16.0.1212.63780closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 16.0.1212.63780closeAndroid 4.2.2GenericAndroid 4.2mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26403 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 16.0Blink Android 4.2Point of ViewMobii R945tabletyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 16.0.1212.63780closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 16.0.1212closeAndroid 4.2.2POVTAB-PR945closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.04801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 16.0.1212.63780WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42004 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 16.0Blink Android 4.2.2Point Of ViewMobii 945 HD+tabletyescloseclose0.035 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 16.0.1212.63780closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 42closeAndroid 4.2Tabletyesyescloseclose0.045 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 13:28:35 | by ThaDafinser