User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; archive.org_bot/3.3.0 +http://pandora.nla.gov.au/crawl.html)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/Parser/fixtures/bots.yml
Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yesInternet ArchiveBot/Crawler0.055 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
close closeyesArchive.orgclose0.20002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
yesarchive.org botCrawler0.002 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
close closeclosecloseyesarchive.org_botclose0.006 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mozilla 5.0 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.49105 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
closeyesArchive.orgclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closecloseclosecloseclosecloseyesclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close 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 13:36:15 | by ThaDafinser