User agent detail

Lynx/2.8.5rel.1 libwww-FM/2.15FC SSL-MM/1.4.1c OpenSSL/0.9.7e-dev
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-562.php
Lynx 2.8Linux unknownunknown unknowngeneral DesktopDesktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Lynx 2.8 Linux Desktop0.011 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Lynx 2.8.5rel.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Lynx 2.8.5rel.1close desktop-browsercloseclose0.19 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Lynx 2.8Text-based 0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Lynx 2.8.5rel.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Lynx 2.8.5close closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Lynx 2.8.5rel.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.052 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Lynx 2.8.5rel.1 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Lynx 2.8.5 closeclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
close LynxBrowserOther Non-Mobilecloseclose0.018 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 13:41:35 | by ThaDafinser