User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 2.3.4; LG-P970 Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.58 Mobile Safari/537.31 OPR/14.0.1074.57453
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
LGP970 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 14.0Blink Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes0.06901 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 14.0.1074.57453closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 14.0.1074.57453closeAndroid 2.3.4LGP970mobile-browseryescloseclose0.24997 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mobile 14.0Presto Android 2.3LGP970smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 14.0.1074.57453closeAndroid 2.3.4closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 14.0.1074closeAndroid 2.3.4LGP970closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 2.3.4closecloseclosecloseclose0.05699 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 14.0.1074.57453WebKit 537.31Android 2.3.4LGLGP970closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41496 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 14.0Webkit 537.31Android 2.3.4LGOptimus Blackmobile:smartyescloseclose0.028 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 14.0.1074.57453closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 14closeAndroid 2.3LGP970Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.11301 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 13:34:48 | by ThaDafinser