User agent detail

Vodafone/1.0/HTC_Touch_Pro Opera/9.50 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCTouch_Pro Opera Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mobile 9.50Presto 2.2 HTCTouch ProMobile Phoneyes0.009 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 9.50closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile 9.50closeWindows 5.1HTCTouch Diamond 2mobile-browseryescloseclose0.19802 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 9.50Presto Windows XPHTCTouch Prosmartphoneyes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 9.50closeWindows XPclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 9.50closeWindows XP HTCTouch_Pro Operacloseclosecloseclose0.012 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 9.50closeWindows XP closecloseclosecloseclose0.04601 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 9.50 Windows Windows NT 5.1HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40604 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 9.50 Windows Mobile HTCTouch Promobile:smartyescloseclose0.006 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.50closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera 11.10closeLinux armv6l Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.013 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 13:40:04 | by ThaDafinser