User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 5_1_1 like Mac OS X; de-DE) AppleWebKit/534.35 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/11.0.696.65 Safari/534.35 Puffin/3.9174IP Mobile
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-876.php
Puffin 3.0iOS 5.1unknown AppleiPod TouchMobile Deviceyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Puffin 3.0WebKit iOS 5.1AppleiPod TouchMobile Deviceyesyes0.016 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Chrome 11.0.696.65closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Puffin 3.9174closeiOS 5.1.1AppleiPod touchmobile-browseryescloseclose0.176 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Puffin 3.9174WebKit iOS 5.1AppleiPod Touchportable media playeryes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 11.0.696.65closeiOS 5.1.1closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Puffin 3.9174closeiOS 5.1.1AppleiPodcloseclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Chrome 11.0.696.65closeiPhone OS 5.1.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.062 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Puffin 3.9174WebKit 534.35 iPhonecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.405 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Puffin 3Webkit 534.35iOS 5.1.1AppleiPod touchmobile:smartyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 11.0.696.65closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Mobile Safari 5.1.1closeiOS 5.1.1AppleiPod TouchOther Mobileyesyescloseclose0.06301 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 13:43:05 | by ThaDafinser