User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; NT-3710S Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/39.0.2171.59 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-563.php
Chrome 39.0Android 4.2unknown iconBITNetTAB SKY 3G PlusTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 39.0Blink Android 4.2iconBITNetTAB SKY 3G PlusTabletyesyes0.08901 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 39.0.2171.59closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 39.0.2171.59closeAndroid 4.2.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.25402 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 39.0Blink Android 4.2tabletyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 39.0.2171.59closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 39.0.2171closeAndroid 4.2.2IconBITNT-3710Scloseclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.06601 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 39.0.2171.59WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 39Blink Android 4.2.2IconBitNetTab Sky 3G Plustabletyescloseclose0.019 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 39.0.2171.59closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 42closeAndroid 4.2Tabletyesyescloseclose0.027 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 13:34:41 | by ThaDafinser