User agent detail

emobile/1.0.0 (H11T; like Gecko; Wireless) NetFront/3.4
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/carrier-emobile.yaml
NetFront 3.4 ToshibaH11Tmobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
NetFront 3.4NetFront Mobile Deviceyes0.015 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
emobile 1.0.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront 3.4close AccessNetFront Ver. 3.4mobile-browseryescloseclose0.185 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
NetFront 3.4NetFront 0.009 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
NetFront 3.4close closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Mozilla 1.0.0close closecloseclosecloseclose0.061 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
NetFront Mobilecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.412 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
NetFront 3.4 ToshibaH11Tmobile:featureyescloseclose0.004 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
emobile closeclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
NetFront 3.4close AccessNetFront Ver. 3.4Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.01 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 13:26:42 | by ThaDafinser