User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.4.3; en-us; KFASWI Build/KTU84M) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Silk/3.66 like Chrome/39.0.2171.93 Safari/537.36
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-682.php
Silk 3.66Android 4.4unknown AmazonFire HD 7 (4th Gen)Tabletyesyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Silk 3.66Blink Android 4.4AmazonFire HD 7 (4th Gen)Tabletyesyes0.012 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Silk 3.66closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Chrome 39.0.2171.93closeAndroid 4.4.3desktop-browsercloseclose0.253 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Chrome 39.0Blink Android 4.4AmazonFire HD 7tabletyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Chrome 39.0.2171.93closeAndroid 4.4.3closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Amazon Silk 3.66closeAndroid 4.4.3AmazonKindlecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 4.4.3closecloseclosecloseclose0.286 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Silk 3.66WebKit 537.36Fire OS AmazonKindlecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.405 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Silk 3.66Blink FireOS 4.5AmazonFire HD 7tabletyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Chrome 39.0.2171.93closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Chrome Mobile 34closeAndroid 4.4AmazonKFASWITabletyesyescloseclose0.017 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 13:43:05 | by ThaDafinser