User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; MID802 Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.102 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-525.php
Chrome 38.0Android 4.2unknown MantaMID802 POWER DUO HDTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 38.0Blink Android 4.2MantaMID802 POWER DUO HDTabletyesyes0.103 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeAndroid 4.2.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.27503 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 38.0Blink Android 4.2Manta MultimediaMID802tabletyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 38.0.2125closeAndroid 4.2.2MantaMID802closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.09301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.102WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 38Blink Android 4.2.2MID802tabletyescloseclose0.09101 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 42closeAndroid 4.2Tabletyesyescloseclose0.031 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 13:30:09 | by ThaDafinser