User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/27.0.1453.110 Safari/537.36 CoolNovo/2.0.9.20
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/desktop.yml
CoolNovo 2.0.9.20Windows XPWebKit desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 27.0WebKit WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.086 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 27.0.1453.110closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
CoolNovo 2.0.9.20closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.18305 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
CoolNovo 2.0WebKit Windows XPdesktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 27.0.1453.110closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 27.0.1453closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 27.0.1453.110closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.07102 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
CoolNovo 2.0.9.20WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40212 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
CoolNovo 2.0.9Blink Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.009 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 27.0.1453.110closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 27.0.1453closeMac OS X 10.7.3Desktopcloseclose0.018 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 13:37:20 | by ThaDafinser