User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:19.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/19.0 SeaMonkey/2.16
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/browser-seamonkey.yaml
SeaMonkey 2.16Windows XPGecko 19.0desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
SeaMonkey 2.16Gecko WinXP 5.1Windows DesktopDesktop0.01 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Firefox 19.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
SeaMonkey 2.16closeWindows 5.1desktop-browsercloseclose0.18102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
SeaMonkey 2.16Gecko Windows XPdesktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
SeaMonkey 2.16closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
SeaMonkey 2.16closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
SeaMonkey 2.16closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.06501 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Seamonkey 2.16Gecko 20100101Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40204 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
SeaMonkey 2.16Gecko 19.0Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Firefox 19.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Firefox 19.0closeWindows XPDesktopcloseclose0.06401 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 13:32:02 | by ThaDafinser