User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.4.3; en-us; KFSAWA Build/KTU84M) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Silk/3.41 like Chrome/37.0.2026.117 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tablet.yml
Chrome 37.0.2026.117Android 4.4.3Blink AmazonFire HDX 8.9 4Gtablet Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Silk 3.41Blink Android 4.4AmazonKindleEbook Readeryesyes0.058 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Silk 3.41closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 37.0.2026.117closeAndroid 4.4.3desktop-browsercloseclose0.252 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 37.0Blink Android 4.4AmazonFire HDX 8.9 4Gtabletyes0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 37.0.2026.117closeAndroid 4.4.3closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Amazon Silk 3.41closeAndroid 4.4.3AmazonKindlecloseclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.4.3closecloseclosecloseclose0.093 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Silk 3.41WebKit 537.36Fire OS AmazonKindlecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Silk 3.41Blink FireOS 4.5AmazonFire HDX 8.9" (2014)tabletyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 37.0.2026.117closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 37closeAndroid 4.4AmazonKFSAWATabletyesyescloseclose0.023 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 13:36:55 | by ThaDafinser