User agent detail

Opera/9.80 (J2ME/MIDP; Opera Mini/8.0.35626/35.7827; U; vi) Presto/2.8.119 Version/11.10
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-635.php
Opera Mini 8.0JAVA unknown2.8 unknowngeneral Mobile PhoneMobile Phoneyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 8.0Presto 2.8JAVA Mobile Phoneyes0.018 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 11.10closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mini 8.0.35626closeJVM OperaMini 5mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18702 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 8.0Presto 0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini 8.0.35626close closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 8.0.35626close closeclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini 8.0.35626close closecloseclosecloseclose0.09401 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini 8.0.35626Presto 2.8.119 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.47605 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 8.0Presto 2.8.119 mobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 11.10closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera Mini 8.0close OperaMini 5Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.014 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 13:32:04 | by ThaDafinser