User agent detail

Opera/9.02 (Linux armv5tejl; U; ARCHOS; GOGI; a605f; de)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
Archosa605f Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera 9.02Presto 2.0Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.009 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 9.02closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.02closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.179 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 9.02Presto GNU/Linux ArchosZ110smartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 9.02closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 9.2closeLinux Archosa605fcloseclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 9.02closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.045 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 9.2 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.406 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 9.02 Archos605f WiFimediayescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.02closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l HTCMDA Vario VFeature Phoneyesyescloseclose0.029 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 13:25:55 | by ThaDafinser