User agent detail

Opera/3.1 (FOMA M1000; U; FOMA; ja-JP; rv:1.1.2) Opera/20050207 Opera/3.11
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/carrier-docomo.yaml
Opera Mobile 3.1UIQ MotorolaM1000mobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 3.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 3.1close desktop-browsercloseclose0.194 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 3.1Presto 0.013 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 3.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 3.1close closeclosecloseclose0.017 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 3.11close closecloseclosecloseclose0.054 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 3.1 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.426 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 3.1 UIQ MotorolaM1000mobile:featureyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 3.1closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 30.0.1835.140closeWindows 8.1Desktopcloseclose0.018 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 13:29:44 | by ThaDafinser