User agent detail

F2051 DoCoMo/2.0 F2051(c100;TB)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/carrier-docomo.yaml
FujitsuF2051mobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
F2051 closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
close FujitsuF2051mobile-browseryescloseclose0.179 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
DoCoMoF2051feature phoneyes0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close DoCoMoF2051closeclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
F2051closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40504 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
FujitsuF2051mobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
docomo F2051closeclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.009 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 13:31:41 | by ThaDafinser