User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0;Windows NT 5.1;.NET CLR 1.1.4322;.NET CLR 2.0.50727;.NET CLR 3.0.04506.30) Lightspeedsystems
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-146.php
yesLightspeed Systems CrawlerBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesLightspeed Systems CrawlerBot/Crawler0.022 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MSIE 7.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IE 7.0closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.24002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Internet Explorer 7.0Trident Windows XPdesktop0.011 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Internet Explorer 7.0closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
IE 7.0closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.024 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Internet Explorer 7.0closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.08601 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Internet Explorer 7.0Trident Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Internet Explorer 7.0 Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.027 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 7.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
IE 7.0closeWindows XPDesktopcloseclose0.016 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 13:36:10 | by ThaDafinser