User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; One S C2 Build/JDQ39E) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.58 Mobile Safari/537.31
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCOne S C2 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 26.0WebKit Android 4.2Mobile Phoneyesyes0.136 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome Mobile 26.0.1410.58closeAndroid 4.2.2GenericAndroid 4.2mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27703 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome Mobile 26.0WebKit Android 4.2HTCN3smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome Mobile 26.0.1410closeAndroid 4.2.2HTCOne S C2closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.06401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.58WebKit 537.31Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome Dev 26.0.1410.58Webkit 537.31Android 4.2.2One S C2mobile:smartyescloseclose0.09201 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 4.2closeAndroid 4.2Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.055 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 13:29:12 | by ThaDafinser