User agent detail

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Linux 2.2.17-14 i586) Opera 6.0 [en]
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_os.yaml
Linux 2.2.17 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Netscape 4.0Gecko Linux Linux DesktopDesktop0.024 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 6.0closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.19098 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 6.0Presto GNU/Linux desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 6.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 6.0closeLinux 2.2.17closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 6.0closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.09799 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 6.0 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40896 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera 6.0 Linux desktopcloseclose0.007 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 5.0closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close Desktopcloseclose0.021 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 13:38:42 | by ThaDafinser