User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Dragon/36.7.0.8 Chrome/36.0.1985.97 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-712.php
Dragon 36.7WinVista 6.0unknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Dragon 36.7Blink WinVista 6.0Windows DesktopDesktop0.096 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows 6.0desktop-browsercloseclose0.18702 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 36.0Blink Windows Vistadesktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows Vistaclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 36.0.1985closeWindows Vista closeclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows Vista closecloseclosecloseclose0.04901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.97WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.43304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Comodo Dragon 36.7Blink Windows Vistadesktopcloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows 8.1Desktopcloseclose0.017 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 13:28:41 | by ThaDafinser