User agent detail

IBrowse/2.5beta (AmigaOS 4.1; PPC)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/os-amigaos.yaml
IBrowse 2.5AmigaOS 4.1 desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesAmigaBot/Crawler0.023 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
IBrowse 2.5betacloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
IBrowse 2.5betacloseAmiga OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.18502 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
IBrowse 2.5 AmigaOS 4.1desktop0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
IBrowse 2.5close closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
IBrowse 2.5betacloseAmigaOS 4.1closecloseclosecloseclose0.09801 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mac closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.45805 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
IBrowse 2.5 AmigaOS 4.1desktopcloseclose0.018 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
No result found

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 13:25:33 | by ThaDafinser