User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.2.2; TX18 Build/JDQ39) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/40.0.2214.69 Safari/537.36 OPR/27.0.1698.88339
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Opera Mobile 27.0Android 4.2unknown IrbisTX18Tabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 27.0Blink Android 4.2IrbisTX18Tabletyesyes0.06 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 27.0.1698.88339closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 27.0.1698.88339closeAndroid 4.2.2IrbisTX18mobile-browseryescloseclose0.289 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 27.0Blink Android 4.2PantechTX18smartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 27.0.1698.88339closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 27.0.1698closeAndroid 4.2.2TX18closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.2.2closecloseclosecloseclose0.099 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 27.0.1698.88339WebKit 537.36Android 4.2.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.408 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 27.0Blink Android 4.2.2TX18tabletyescloseclose0.082 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 27.0.1698.88339closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 4.2closeAndroid 4.2IrbisTX18Tabletyesyescloseclose0.131 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 13:41:01 | by ThaDafinser