User agent detail

MQQBrowser/3.1/Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.6; zh-cn; Lenovo A60+ Build/LenovoLePhone) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1

Detected by 8 of 8 providers
As bot detected by 0 of 7

GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeActions
BrowscapPhp
6011
QQbrowser 3.1WebKit Android 2.3Mobile Phoneyesyes Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Android Browser 4.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.1
QQ Browser 3.1WebKit Android 2.3LenovoA60+smartphoneyes Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Navigator 4.0closeAndroid 2.3.6closecloseyesclosecloseclose Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
QQ Browser Mobile 3.1closeAndroid 2.3.6LenovoA60+closeclosecloseclose Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.9
QQ Browser 3.1Webkit 533.1Android 2.3.6LenovoA60mobile:smartyescloseclose Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari 4.0closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 2.3closeAndroid 2.3LenovoA60+Smartphoneyesyescloseclose 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 2016-01-26 16:41:55 | by ThaDafinser