User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.1.1; Xenta TAB10-201 Build/Xenta TAB10-201) AppleWebKit/537.31 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/26.0.1410.40 Safari/537.31 OPR/14.0.1074.54070
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
YarvikTAB10-201 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 14.0Blink Android 4.1Mobile Phoneyesyes0.017 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Next 14.0.1074.54070closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 14.0.1074.54070closeAndroid 4.1.1GenericAndroid 4.1mobile-browseryescloseclose0.297 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 14.0Presto Android 4.1YarvikXenta 10ictabletyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 14.0.1074.54070closeAndroid 4.1.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 14.0.1074closeAndroid 4.1.1YarvikTAB10-201closeclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.1.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.076 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 14.0.1074.54070WebKit 537.31Android 4.1.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 14.0Webkit 537.31Android 4.1.1YarvikXenta 10ictabletyescloseclose0.034 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 14.0.1074.54070closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 4.1closeAndroid 4.1Tabletyesyescloseclose0.05102 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 13:41:18 | by ThaDafinser