User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/31.0.1650.48 Safari/537.36 QQBrowser/8.0.3197.400
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/desktop.yml
QQ Browser 8.0.3197.400Windows XPWebKit desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 31.0Blink WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.027 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 31.0.1650.48closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 31.0.1650.48closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.191 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
QQ Browser 8.0WebKit Windows XPdesktop0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 31.0.1650.48closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
QQ Browser 8.0.3197closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 31.0.1650.48closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.077 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
QQ Browser 8.0.3197.400WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.416 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
QQ Browser 8.0Blink Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 31.0.1650.48closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 31.0.1650.63closeLinux i686 Desktopcloseclose0.034 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 13:33:13 | by ThaDafinser