User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; B1-711 Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/33.0.1750.136 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-563.php
Chrome 33.0Android 4.2unknown AcerIconia B1-711Tabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 33.0Blink Android 4.2AcerIconia B1-711Tabletyesyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 33.0.1750.136closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 33.0.1750.136closeAndroid 4.2.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.25102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 33.0Blink Android 4.2AcerIconia B1tabletyes0.01 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 33.0.1750.136closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 33.0.1750closeAndroid 4.2.2AcerB1-711closeclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.29103 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 33.0.1750.136WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 33Blink Android 4.2.2AcerIconia B1-711tabletyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 33.0.1750.136closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 4.2closeAndroid 4.2AcerB1-711Tabletyesyescloseclose0.077 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 13:37:37 | by ThaDafinser