User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; IdeaTab S6000-H Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/36.0.1985.135 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-618.php
Chrome 36.0Android 4.2unknown VodafoneIdeaTab S6000-HTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 36.0Blink Android 4.2VodafoneIdeaTab S6000-HTabletyesyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.135closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.135closeAndroid 4.2.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.266 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 36.0Blink Android 4.2LenovoIdeaTab S6000tabletyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.135closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 36.0.1985closeAndroid 4.2.2LenovoIdeaTab S6000-Hcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.056 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.135WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.416 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 36Blink Android 4.2.2LenovoIdeaTab S6000tabletyescloseclose0.026 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.135closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 24closeAndroid 4.2LenovoIdeaTabTabletyesyescloseclose0.047 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 13:29:36 | by ThaDafinser