User agent detail

ArchiveTeam ArchiveBot/20141009.02 (wpull 0.1002a1) and not Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2125.101 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-500.php
yesArchiveBotBot/Crawler Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesArchiveBotBot/Crawler0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.101closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.101closeWindows 6.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.194 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
yes0.002 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.101closeWindows 7closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
close closeclosecloseyesArchiveTeam ArchiveBotclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.101closeWindows 7 closecloseclosecloseclose0.063 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 38.0.2125.101WebKit 537.36Windows Windows NT 6.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
closeyesArchiveBotclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 38.0.2125.101closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 8.0closeFedora Desktopcloseclose0.008 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