User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.1.2; N9510 Build/JZO54K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/42.0.2311.108 Mobile Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Chrome 42.0Android 4.1unknown ZTEWarp 4G LTEMobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 42.0Blink Android 4.1ZTEWarp 4G LTEMobile Phoneyesyes0.021 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.108closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome Mobile 42.0.2311.108closeAndroid 4.1.2ZTEN9510mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26503 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome Mobile 42.0Blink Android 4.1ZTEWrap 4Gsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.108closeAndroid 4.1.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome Mobile 42.0.2311closeAndroid 4.1.2ZTEN9510closeclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.1.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.12001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 42.0.2311.108WebKit 537.36Android 4.1.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 42Blink Android 4.1.2ZTEN9510 Warpmobile:smartyescloseclose0.035 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.108closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 42closeAndroid 4.1ZTEN9510Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.07 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 13:35:53 | by ThaDafinser