User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.0.4; ThL W1 Build/IMM76D) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/41.0.2272.81 Mobile Safari/537.36 OPR/28.0.1764.90386
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Opera Mobile 28.0Android 4.0unknown ThLW1Mobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 28.0Blink Android 4.0ThLW1Mobile Phoneyesyes0.02 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 28.0.1764.90386closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 28.0.1764.90386closeAndroid 4.0.4ThLW1mobile-browseryescloseclose0.268 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mobile 28.0Blink Android 4.0ThLW1smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 28.0.1764.90386closeAndroid 4.0.4closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 28.0.1764closeAndroid 4.0.4ThlW1closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.0.4closecloseclosecloseclose0.052 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 28.0.1764.90386WebKit 537.36Android 4.0.4closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.417 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 28.0Blink Android 4.0.4THLW1mobile:smartyescloseclose0.033 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 28.0.1764.90386closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 28closeAndroid 4.0ThLW1Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.041 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 13:29:55 | by ThaDafinser