User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:20.0) Gecko/20.0 SeaMonkey/2.17a1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/browser-seamonkey.yaml
SeaMonkey 2.17a1Windows XPGecko 20.0desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
SeaMonkey 2.17Gecko WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.021 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
SeaMonkey 2.17a1closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.182 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
SeaMonkey 2.17Gecko Windows XPdesktop0.007 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
SeaMonkey 2.17a1closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
SeaMonkey 2.17.0closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
SeaMonkey 2.17a1closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.064 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Seamonkey 2.17a1Gecko 20.0Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.484 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
SeaMonkey 2.17a1Gecko 20.0Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
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 13:27:53 | by ThaDafinser