User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.1; i-mobile IQ X2 Build/JOP40D) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.58 Mobile Safari/537.31
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
imobileIQ X2 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 26.0WebKit Android 4.2Mobile Phoneyesyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome Mobile 26.0.1410.58closeAndroid 4.2.1GenericAndroid 4.2mobile-browseryescloseclose0.274 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome Mobile 26.0WebKit Android 4.2i-mobileIQ X2smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeAndroid 4.2.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome Mobile 26.0.1410closeAndroid 4.2.1imobileIQ X2closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.047 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.58WebKit 537.31Android 4.2.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.407 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome Dev 26.0.1410.58Webkit 537.31Android 4.2.1i-MobileiQ X2mobile:smartyescloseclose0.042 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 4.2closeAndroid 4.2Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.056 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 13:36:37 | by ThaDafinser