User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; en) Opera 8.00
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/desktop.yml
Opera 8.00Windows XPPresto desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 8.00Presto 1.0WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.009 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 8.00closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 8.00closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.191 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 8.00Presto Windows XPdesktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 8.00closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 8.0closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 8.00closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.171 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 8.0 Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.414 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 8.00 Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.009 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 6.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 8.52closeWindows XPDesktopcloseclose0.009 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 13:31:36 | by ThaDafinser