User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.1; AT10-A Build/JOP40D) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.102 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-523.php
Chrome 38.0Android 4.2unknown ToshibaeXcite PureTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 38.0Blink Android 4.2ToshibaeXcite PureTabletyesyes0.12701 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeAndroid 4.2.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.299 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 38.0Blink Android 4.2tabletyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeAndroid 4.2.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 38.0.2125closeAndroid 4.2.1ToshibaAT10-Acloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.053 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.102WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.406 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 38Blink Android 4.2.1ToshibaExcite AT10-Atabletyescloseclose0.034 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.102closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 26closeAndroid 4.2ToshibaExcite AT10-ATabletyesyescloseclose0.048 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 13:35:03 | by ThaDafinser