User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; Lenovo B6000-H Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/42.0.2311.111 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-663.php
Chrome 42.0Android 4.2unknown LenovoYoga 8 3GTabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 42.0Blink Android 4.2LenovoYoga 8 3GTabletyesyes0.012 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.111closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 42.0.2311.111closeAndroid 4.2.2desktop-browsercloseclose0.25203 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 42.0Blink Android 4.2LenovoIdeaTab B6000-Htabletyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.111closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 42.0.2311closeAndroid 4.2.2LenovoB6000-Hcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.06701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 42.0.2311.111WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 42Blink Android 4.2.2LenovoB6000 Yoga Tablet 8tabletyescloseclose0.024 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.111closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 28closeAndroid 4.2LenovoB6000-HTabletyesyescloseclose0.036 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 13:38:28 | by ThaDafinser