User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/41.0.2272.105 Safari/537.36 Vivaldi/1.0.162.9
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-695.php
Vivaldi 1.0Win7 6.1unknown unknownWindows DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Vivaldi 1.0Blink Win7 6.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.014 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Vivaldi 1.0.162.9closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 41.0.2272.105closeWindows 6.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.251 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Vivaldi 1.0Blink Windows 7desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Vivaldi 1.0.162.9closeWindows 7closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Vivaldi 1.0.162closeWindows 7 closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 41.0.2272.105closeWindows 7 closecloseclosecloseclose0.068 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Vivaldi 1.0.162.9WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 6.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.366 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Vivaldi 1.0Blink Windows 7desktopcloseclose0.01 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 41.0.2272.105closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 41.0.2272.76closeWindows VistaDesktopcloseclose0.08202 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 13:41:06 | by ThaDafinser