User agent detail

NCSA Mosaic/2.6b1 [en-gb] (X11;UNIX_System_V 4.2 R4000) libwww/2.12 modified
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
whichbrowser/parser
/tests/data/desktop/browser-mosaic.yaml
NCSA Mosaic 2.6UNIX System V 4.2 desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
yeslibwwwBot/Crawler0.02 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
NCSA closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
NCSA Mosaic 2.6b1closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19906 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
No result found
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentStringCom
NCSA_Mosaic 2.6b1closeUnix closecloseclosecloseclose0.06102 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Mosaic 2.6b1 a UNIX based OS closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40512 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
NCSA Mosaic 2.6 UNIX System V 4.2desktopcloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
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 13:37:21 | by ThaDafinser