User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Dragon/36.7.0.1 Chrome/36.0.1985.97 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-712.php
Dragon 36.7WinXP 5.1unknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Dragon 36.7Blink WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.013 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.192 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 36.0Blink Windows XPdesktop0.01 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 36.0.1985closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.059 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 36.0.1985.97WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Comodo Dragon 36.7Blink Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 36.0.1985.97closeWindows 8.1Desktopcloseclose0.015 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 13:30:03 | by ThaDafinser