User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.4.2; Logicom-S9782 Build/KOT49H) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/40.0.2214.89 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Chrome 40.0Android 4.4unknown LogicomS9782Tabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 40.0Blink Android 4.4LogicomS9782Tabletyesyes0.02 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeAndroid 4.4.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.27316 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 40.0Blink Android 4.4tabletyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeAndroid 4.4.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 40.0.2214closeAndroid 4.4.2Logicom-S9782closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.4.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.04703 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 40.0.2214.89WebKit 537.36Android 4.4.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40524 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 40Blink Android 4.4.2Logicom-S9782tabletyescloseclose0.07801 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 40.0.2214.89closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 40closeAndroid 4.4LogicomS9782Tabletyesyescloseclose0.241 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 13:37:13 | by ThaDafinser