User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Fedora; Linux i686) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/45.0.2454.101 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/os-linux.yaml
Chrome 45Fedora Blink 537.36desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Chrome 45.0Blink Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.115 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 45.0.2454.101closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 45.0.2454.101closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.18502 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 45.0Blink Fedora desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 45.0.2454.101closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 45.0.2454closeFedora closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 45.0.2454.101closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.08501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 45.0.2454.101WebKit 537.36Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41304 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 45Blink Fedora desktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 45.0.2454.101closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 45.0.2454.93closeWindows 8.1Desktopcloseclose0.017 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 13:40:25 | by ThaDafinser