User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/28.0.1500.71 Safari/537.36 OPR/15.0.1147.138
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/browser-opera.yaml
Opera 15.0Windows XPBlink 537.36desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 15.0Blink WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.019 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 15.0.1147.138closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 15.0.1147.138closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.18602 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 15.0Blink Windows XPdesktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 15.0.1147.138closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 15.0.1147closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 28.0.1500.71closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.06501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 15.0.1147.138WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 15.0Blink Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 15.0.1147.138closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 15.0.1147.18closeWindows 8Desktopcloseclose0.009 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 13:39:51 | by ThaDafinser