User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/535.11 (KHTML, like Gecko) Comodo_Dragon/17.1.0.0 Chrome/17.0.963.38 Safari/535.11
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/desktop.yml
Comodo Dragon 17.1.0.0Windows 7WebKit desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Dragon 17.1WebKit Win7 6.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.013 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 17.0.963.38closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Comodo Dragon 17.1.0.0closeWindows 6.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.191 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Comodo Dragon 17.1WebKit Windows 7desktop0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 17.0.963.38closeWindows 7closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Comodo Dragon 17.1.0closeWindows 7 closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Comodo_Dragon 17.1.0.0closeWindows 7 closecloseclosecloseclose0.072 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Comodo Dragon 17.1.0.0WebKit 535.11Windows Windows NT 6.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.416 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Comodo Dragon 17.1Webkit 535.11Windows 7desktopcloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 17.0.963.38closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 17.0.963.26closeLinux x86_64 Desktopcloseclose0.013 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 13:29:43 | by ThaDafinser