User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; ja-JP; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090910 SeaMonkey/1.1.18
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
woothee/woothee-testset
/testsets/pc_misc.yaml
UNKNOWN Linux pc Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
SeaMonkey 1.1Gecko Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.149 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
SeaMonkey 1.1.18closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.179 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
SeaMonkey 1.1Gecko GNU/Linux desktop0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
SeaMonkey 1.1.18closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
SeaMonkey 1.1.18closeLinux closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
SeaMonkey 1.1.18closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.05 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Seamonkey 1.1.18Gecko 20090910Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.41 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
SeaMonkey 1.1.18Gecko 1.8.1Linux desktopcloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 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 13:30:02 | by ThaDafinser