User agent detail

Z221; Mozilla/5.0 (Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1; Opera Mini/att/4.2.22250; U; en-US) Opera 9.50
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
browscap/browscap
/tests/fixtures/issues/issue-317.php
Opera Mini 4.2JAVA unknown2.2 AT&TZ221Mobile Phoneyes Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Opera Mini 4.2Presto 2.2JAVA AT&TZ221Mobile Phoneyes0.01 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Minicloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 9.50close desktop-browsercloseclose0.194 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera Mini 4.2Presto 0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera Mini attclose closecloseyesclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mini 4.2.22250close closeclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mini close closecloseclosecloseclose0.079 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera Mini closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.405 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mini 4.2 mobile:featureyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.50closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Java Applet close ZTEZ221Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.012 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 13:40:11 | by ThaDafinser