User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (AmigaOS; U; AmigaOS 1.3; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 SeaMonkey/1.1.15
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
piwik/device-detector
/Tests/fixtures/desktop.yml
SeaMonkey 1.1.15AmigaOS 1.3Gecko desktop Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Mozilla 1.8Gecko 1.8 Desktop0.05 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
No result found
NeutrinoApiCom
SeaMonkey 1.1.15closeAmiga OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.18002 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
SeaMonkey 1.1Gecko AmigaOS 1.3desktop0.005 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
SeaMonkey 1.1.15close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
SeaMonkey 1.1.15close closeclosecloseclose0.003 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
SeaMonkey 1.1.15closeAmigaOS 1.3closecloseclosecloseclose0.04701 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Seamonkey 1.1.15Gecko 20090303 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40404 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
SeaMonkey 1.1.15Gecko 1.8.1AmigaOS 1.3desktopcloseclose0.004 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 13:39:55 | by ThaDafinser