User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.4.2; HTC 919d Build/KOT49H) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/42.0.2311.108 Mobile Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Chrome 42.0Android 4.4unknown HTCButterfly S CDMAMobile Phoneyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 42.0Blink Android 4.4HTCButterfly S CDMAMobile Phoneyesyes0.015 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.108closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome Mobile 42.0.2311.108closeAndroid 4.4.2HTC9060mobile-browseryescloseclose0.26903 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome Mobile 42.0Blink Android 4.4HTC919dsmartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.108closeAndroid 4.4.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome Mobile 42.0.2311closeAndroid 4.4.2HTC919dcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.4.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.05201 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 42.0.2311.108WebKit 537.36Android 4.4.2HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 42Blink Android 4.4.2HTCButterfly Smobile:smartyescloseclose0.014 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 42.0.2311.108closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chromium 30closeAndroid 4.4Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.024 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 13:39:54 | by ThaDafinser