User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; MID802 Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/30.0.1599.82 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-523.php
Chrome 30.0Android 4.2unknown MantaMID802 POWER DUO HDTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 30.0Blink Android 4.2MantaMID802 POWER DUO HDTabletyesyes0.02 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 30.0.1599.82closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 30.0.1599.82closeAndroid 4.2.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.29 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 30.0Blink Android 4.2Manta MultimediaMID802tabletyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 30.0.1599.82closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 30.0.1599closeAndroid 4.2.2MantaMID802closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.069 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 30.0.1599.82WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.412 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 30Blink Android 4.2.2MID802tabletyescloseclose0.11401 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 30.0.1599.82closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 42closeAndroid 4.2Tabletyesyescloseclose0.035 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 13:35:17 | by ThaDafinser