User agent detail

AtomicBrowser/5.8.0 CFNetwork/485.13.9 Darwin/11.0.0
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-750.php
Atomic Browser 5.8iOS 4.3unknown Applegeneral Mobile DeviceMobile Deviceyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Atomic Browser 5.8WebKit iOS 4.3AppleMobile Deviceyesyes0.01 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
AtomicBrowser 5.8.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Atomic Web Browser 5.8.0closeiOS mobile-browseryescloseclose0.193 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
iOS 4.3yes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
CFNetwork 485.13.9closeiOS 4.3Applecloseclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Darwin closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
iOS 4.3mobile:smartyescloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Mobile Safari 4.3closeiOS 4.3AppleiPhoneSmartphoneyesyescloseclose0.017 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 13:41:23 | by ThaDafinser