User agent detail

DoCoMo/2.0 D901iS
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
DoCoMoD901iS Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
DoCoMo 2.0 JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.005 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
DoCoMo 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront close DoCoMoD901iSmobile-browseryescloseclose0.232 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
DoCoMoD901iSfeature phoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close DoCoMoD901iScloseclosecloseclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
D901iScloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.412 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
MitsubishiD901iSmobile:featureyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
docomo D901iScloseclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close DoCoMoD901iSFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.024 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 13:26:52 | by ThaDafinser