User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML like Gecko) Chrome/35.0.1916.114 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-436.php
yesFake ChromeBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesFake ChromeBot/Crawler0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 35.0.1916.114closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 35.0.1916.114closeWindows 6.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.18102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 35.0Blink Windows 8desktop0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 35.0.1916.114closeWindows 8closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 35.0.1916closeWindows 8 closeclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 35.0.1916.114closeWindows 8 closecloseclosecloseclose0.07701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 35.0.1916.114WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 6.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 35Blink Windows 8desktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 35.0.1916.114closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 35.0.1849.0closeWindows 7Desktopcloseclose0.018 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 13:38:17 | by ThaDafinser