User agent detail

MQQBrowser/Mini2.5 (SonyEricssonJ105i/R1HA035)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/mobile/os-feature.yaml
QQ Browser Mini 2.5 Sony EricssonNaitemobile:featureyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
MQQBrowser Mini2.5closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
QQbrowser Mini2.5close mobile-browseryescloseclose0.18002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Sony EricssonNaitefeature phoneyes0.01 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
QQ Browser Mini 2.5close SonyEricssonJ105icloseclosecloseclose0.01 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
QQ Browser Sony EricssonSony Ericsson J105icloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
QQ Browser Mini 2.5 Sony EricssonNaitemobile:featureyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.008 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 13:33:34 | by ThaDafinser