User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (Window NT 6.2; Win64; x64) Presto/2.12.388 Version/12.16
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-811.php
yesFake BrowserBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesFake BrowserBot/Crawler0.022 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 12.16closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 12.16close desktop-browsercloseclose0.27203 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 12.16Presto 0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 12.16close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 12.16close closeclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 12.16close closecloseclosecloseclose0.07801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 12.16Presto 2.12.388 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 12.16Presto 2.12.388 desktopcloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 12.16closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 12.16closeLinux x86_64 Desktopcloseclose0.012 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 13:31:57 | by ThaDafinser