User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_9_1; en-US) AppleWebKit/533.21.1+(KHTML, like Gecko, Safari/533.19.4) Version/5.11 OmniWeb/622.16.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-096.php
OmniWeb 5.11MacOSX 10.9unknown AppleMacintoshDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
OmniWeb 5.11WebKit MacOSX 10.9AppleMacintoshDesktop0.015 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 5.11closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
OmniWeb 622.16.closeMac OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.19802 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
OmniWeb 622.16WebKit Mac 10.9desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
OmniWeb 622.16.0closeOS X 10.9.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
OmniWeb 622.16.0closeMac OS X 10.9.1closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
OmniWeb 622.16.0closeOS X 10.9.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.06801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
OmniWeb 622.16.0WebKit 533.21.1Mac OS X 10.9.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.46405 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
OmniWeb Webkit 533.21.1OS X Mavericks 10.9desktopcloseclose0.008 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 5.11closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 5.0.5closeMac OS X 10.6.8Desktopcloseclose0.079 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 13:40:08 | by ThaDafinser