User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Beamrise/27.3.0.5964 Chrome/27.0.1453.116 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-712.php
Beamrise 27.3Win7 6.1unknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Beamrise 27.3WebKit Win7 6.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.02 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 27.0.1453.116closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Beamrise 27.3.0.5964closeWindows 6.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.18102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 27.0WebKit Windows 7desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 27.0.1453.116closeWindows 7closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 27.0.1453closeWindows 7 closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 27.0.1453.116closeWindows 7 closecloseclosecloseclose0.04901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 27.0.1453.116WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 6.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Beamrise 27.3.0.5964Blink Windows 7desktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 27.0.1453.116closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 27.0.1453closeMac OS X 10.7.3Desktopcloseclose0.017 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 13:31:09 | by ThaDafinser