User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.1.1; SC-1007JB Build/JRO03H) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.58 Safari/537.31 OPR/14.0.1074.58201
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
SamsungSC-1007JB Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 14.0Blink Android 4.1Mobile Phoneyesyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 14.0.1074.58201closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 14.0.1074.58201closeAndroid 4.1.1GenericAndroid 4.1mobile-browseryescloseclose0.28002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 14.0Presto Android 4.1SuperSonicSC-1007JBtabletyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 14.0.1074.58201closeAndroid 4.1.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 14.0.1074closeAndroid 4.1.1SamsungSC-1007JBcloseclosecloseclose0.004 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.1.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.19901 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 14.0.1074.58201WebKit 537.31Android 4.1.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40702 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 14.0Webkit 537.31Android 4.1.1SC-1007JBtabletyescloseclose0.09001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 14.0.1074.58201closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 4.1closeAndroid 4.1Tabletyesyescloseclose0.053 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 13:37:03 | by ThaDafinser