User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; ZP980+ Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/32.0.1700.72 Mobile Safari/537.36 OPR/19.0.1340.69721
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
ZopoZP980+ Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 19.0Blink Android 4.2Mobile Phoneyesyes0.062 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 19.0.1340.69721closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 19.0.1340.69721closeAndroid 4.2.2ZOPOZP980+mobile-browseryescloseclose0.25502 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mobile 19.0Blink Android 4.2ZopoZP980+smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 19.0.1340.69721closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 19.0.1340closeAndroid 4.2.2ZopoZP980+closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.59906 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 19.0.1340.69721WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.47005 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 19.0Blink Android 4.2.2ZopoZP980+mobile:smartyescloseclose0.05301 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 19.0.1340.69721closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 19closeAndroid 4.2ZOPOZP980+Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.076 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 13:28:42 | by ThaDafinser