User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.1.1; ST10216-1 Build/ST10216-1) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.58 Safari/537.31 OPR/14.0.1074.57768
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
TrekstorST10216-1 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 14.0Blink Android 4.1Mobile Phoneyesyes0.08201 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 14.0.1074.57768closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 14.0.1074.57768closeAndroid 4.1.1GenericAndroid 4.1mobile-browseryescloseclose0.27903 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 14.0Presto Android 4.1yes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 14.0.1074.57768closeAndroid 4.1.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 14.0.1074closeAndroid 4.1.1TrekstorST10216-1closeclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.1.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.11301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 14.0.1074.57768WebKit 537.31Android 4.1.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 14.0Webkit 537.31Android 4.1.1ST10216-1tabletyescloseclose0.08301 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 14.0.1074.57768closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 14closeAndroid 4.1TrekStorST10216-1Tabletyesyescloseclose0.06901 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 13:34:32 | by ThaDafinser