User agent detail

MQQBrowser/20 (Linux; U; 2.3.3; en-us; HTC Desire S Build/GRI40;480*800)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_ua.yaml
QQ Browser Mobile 20 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MQQBrowser 20closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
QQbrowser 20closeLinux mobile-browseryescloseclose0.196 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
QQ Browser 20 GNU/Linux HTCDesire Ssmartphoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
QQ Browser Mobile 20closeLinux HTCDesire Scloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
QQ Browser 20 Linux HTC Desire Scloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.427 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
QQ Browser 2.0 Android 2.3.3HTCDesire Smobile:smartyescloseclose0.012 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.012 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 13:30:41 | by ThaDafinser