User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.4.4; TCL i718M Build/KTU84P) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Chrome/33.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36 MicroMessenger/5.4.0.66_r807534.480 NetType/cmnet
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/smartphone-3.yml
WeChat 5.4.0.66.r807534.480Android 4.4.4 TCLi718Msmartphone Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Android WebView 4.0Blink Android 4.4Mobile Phoneyesyes0.031 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 33.0.0.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Android Webkit 4.0closeAndroid 4.4.4GenericAndroidmobile-browseryescloseclose0.299 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
WeChat 5.4 Android 4.4TCLi718Msmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 33.0.0.0closeAndroid 4.4.4closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome Mobile 33.0.0closeAndroid 4.4.4TCLi718Mcloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.4.4closecloseclosecloseclose0.145 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 33.0.0.0WebKit 537.36Android 4.4.4closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.409 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
WeChat 5.4.0.66Blink Android 4.4.4TCLi718Mmobile:smartyescloseclose0.03 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 33.0.0.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chromium 30closeAndroid 4.4Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.14 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 13:39:07 | by ThaDafinser