User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.6 ; in-id; MITO A200mito a200 Build/GRK39F) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
MitoA200mito a200 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 14.0Blink Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes0.086 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 4.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Android Webkit 4.0closeAndroid GenericAndroid 2.3mobile-browseryescloseclose0.31203 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Android Browser WebKit Android 2.3AcerIconia Tab A200tabletyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Navigator 4.0closeAndroid 2.3.6closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Android 2.3.6closeAndroid 2.3.6MitoA200mito a200closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 2.3.6closecloseclosecloseclose0.07101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Android Browser 4.0WebKit 533.1Android 2.3.6closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40804 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Android Browser Webkit 533.1Android 2.3.6MITO A200mito a200mobile:smartyescloseclose0.10001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 4.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 2.3closeAndroid 2.3Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.071 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 13:38:11 | by ThaDafinser