User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 7.1) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/12.0.742.112 Safari/534.30
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-399.php
yesFake ChromeBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesFake ChromeBot/Crawler0.044 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 12.0.742.112closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 12.0.742.112closeWindows 7.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.18002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 12.0WebKit Windows NTdesktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 12.0.742.112closeWindows closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 12.0.742closeWindows closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 12.0.742.112closeWindows NT closecloseclosecloseclose0.12801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 12.0.742.112WebKit 534.30Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.58506 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 12Webkit 534.30Windows NT 7.1desktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 12.0.742.112closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
closeLinux Desktopcloseclose0.01 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 13:39:32 | by ThaDafinser