User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/33.0.1750.117 Safari/537.36 Nichrome/self/33
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-315.php
Nichrome 33.0Win7 6.1unknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Nichrome 33.0Blink Win7 6.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.119 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 33.0.1750.117closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome selfcloseWindows 6.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.18906 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 33.0Blink Windows 7desktop0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 33.0.1750.117closeWindows 7closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 33.0.1750closeWindows 7 closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 33.0.1750.117closeWindows 7 closecloseclosecloseclose0.11803 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 33.0.1750.117WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 6.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.42613 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 33Blink Windows 7desktopcloseclose0.011 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 33.0.1750.117closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 33.0.1750.152closeLinux i686 Desktopcloseclose0.08 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 13:37:24 | by ThaDafinser