User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 5.0.2; Amazon Jem Build/LRX22G) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/40.0.2214.89 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tablet.yml
Chrome 40.0.2214.89Android 5.0.2Blink AmazonKindle Fire HD 8.9" WiFitablet Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 40.0Blink Android 5.0Mobile Phoneyesyes0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeAndroid 5.0.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.25097 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 40.0Blink Android 5.0AmazonKindle Fire HD 8.9" WiFitabletyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeAndroid 5.0.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 40.0.2214closeAndroid 5.0.2AmazonJemcloseclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 5.0.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.04899 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 40.0.2214.89WebKit 537.36Android 5.0.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.49695 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 40Blink Android 5.0.2AmazonKindle Fire HD 8.9"tabletyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 41closeAndroid 5.0Tabletyesyescloseclose0.043 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 13:34:43 | by ThaDafinser