User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20110302 Conkeror/0.9.2 (Debian-0.9.2+git100804-1)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_os.yaml
Debian Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Mozilla 1.9Gecko 1.9Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.073 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
Conkeror 0.9.2closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19802 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Conkeror 0.9Gecko Debian 0.9desktop0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Mozilla 1.9closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Conkeror 0.9.2closeDebian closeclosecloseclose0.008 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Conkeror 0.9.2closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.14001 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mozilla 1.9.1.16Gecko 20110302Linux 0.9.2closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40904 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Conkeror 0.9.2Gecko 1.9.1Debian desktopcloseclose0.008 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
No result found

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 13:36:03 | by ThaDafinser