User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Slackware Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/39.0.2145.4 Safari/537.36 OPR/26.0.1632.0 (Edition developer)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/os-linux.yaml
Opera Developer 26.0Slackware Blink 537.36desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 26.0Blink Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.041 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 26.0.1632.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 26.0.1632.0closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.20302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 26.0Blink Slackware desktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 26.0.1632.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 26.0.1632closeSlackware closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 39.0.2145.4closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.13101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 26.0.1632.0WebKit 537.36Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Developer 26.0Blink Slackware desktopcloseclose0.008 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 26.0.1632.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 26.0.1632.0closeLinux x86_64 Desktopcloseclose0.013 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 13:37:52 | by ThaDafinser