User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (WindowsCE 6.0; rv:2.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/4.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.1.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_os.yaml
Windows CE Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
Mozilla 2.0Gecko 2.0 Desktop0.03701 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Firefox 4.0.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
SeaMonkey 2.1.1closeWindows desktop-browsercloseclose0.197 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
SeaMonkey 2.1Gecko Windows desktop0.008 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
SeaMonkey 2.1.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
SeaMonkey 2.1.1closeWindows CE closeclosecloseclose0.009 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
SeaMonkey 2.1.1close closecloseclosecloseclose0.067 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Seamonkey 2.1.1Gecko 20100101Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.406 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
SeaMonkey 2.1.1Gecko 2.0.1Windows CE mobile:featureyescloseclose0.005 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Firefox 4.0.1closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Firefox 4.0.1closeMac OS X 10.6Desktopcloseclose0.013 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 13:41:14 | by ThaDafinser