User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows XP) AppleWebKit/537.40 (KHTML, like Gecko) Qt/4.8.0 Safari/537.40
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/os-windows.yaml
Qt 4.8.0Windows XPWebkit 537.40desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Safari 537.40closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Safari 537.40closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.238 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Safari WebKit Windows XPdesktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Safari close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Safari closeWindows XP closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Safari closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.232 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Safari WebKit 537.40Windows Windows NT 5.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.403 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Qt 4.8.0Webkit 537.40Windows XPdesktopcloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Safari 8.0closeFedora Desktopcloseclose0.009 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 13:33:07 | by ThaDafinser