User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.0.4; QS0730C Build/IMM76D) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.58 Safari/53
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/tablet.yml
Chrome 26.0.1410.58Android 4.0.4WebKit 3QQS0730Ctablet Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 26.0WebKit Android 4.0Mobile Phoneyesyes0.061 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeAndroid 4.0.4desktop-browsercloseclose0.28503 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 26.0WebKit Android 4.03QQS0730Ctabletyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeAndroid 4.0.4closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 26.0.1410closeAndroid 4.0.4QS0730Ccloseclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.0.4closecloseclosecloseclose0.07701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 26.0.1410.58WebKit 537.31Android 4.0.4closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome Dev 26.0.1410.58Webkit 537.31Android 4.0.43QQoo! Q-Pad QS0730Ctabletyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 26.0.1410.58closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 26closeAndroid 4.03QQS0730CTabletyesyescloseclose0.05 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 13:40:07 | by ThaDafinser