User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; NetBSD amd64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/43.0.2357.130 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/os-bsd.yaml
Chrome 43NetBSD Blink 537.36desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 43.0.2357.130closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 43.0.2357.130closeBSD desktop-browsercloseclose0.18302 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 43.0Blink NetBSD desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 43.0.2357.130closeNetBSD closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Chrome 43.0.2357closeNetBSD closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 43.0.2357.130closeNetBSD closecloseclosecloseclose0.12101 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Chrome 43.0.2357.130WebKit 537.36a UNIX based OS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Chrome 43Blink NetBSD desktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 43.0.2357.130closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome 43.0.2357.81closeWindows 8.1Desktopcloseclose0.019 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 13:42:39 | by ThaDafinser