User agent detail

DoCoMo/2.0 F11C(c500;TB;W24H17)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
DoCoMoF11C Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
i-mode Browser 2.0 JAVA Mobile Deviceyes0.005 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
DoCoMo 2.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NetFront close DoCoMomobile-browseryescloseclose0.17702 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
DoCoMoF11Cfeature phoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close DoCoMoF11Ccloseclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
F11Ccloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
FujitsuF11Cmobile:featureyescloseclose0.002 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
docomo F11Ccloseclosecloseclosemobilephoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close DoCoMoF-11CFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.03 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 13:32:18 | by ThaDafinser