User agent detail

MQQBrowser/4.0/Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.4; en-us; HTC EVO Design 4G Build/GRJ22) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile Safari/533.1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
HTCEVO Design 4G Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Android Browser 533.1closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
QQbrowser 4.0closeAndroid 2.3.4GenericAndroid 2.3mobile-browseryescloseclose0.25102 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
QQ Browser 4.0WebKit Android 2.3HTCEVO Design 4Gsmartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Navigator closeAndroid 2.3.4closecloseyesclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
QQ Browser Mobile 4.0closeAndroid 2.3.4HTCEVO Design 4Gcloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Android Webkit Browser closeAndroid 2.3.4closecloseclosecloseclose0.047 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
QQ Browser 4.0WebKit 533.1Android 2.3.4HTCcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.40704 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
QQ Browser 4.0Webkit 533.1Android 2.3.4HTCEVO Design 4Gmobile:smartyescloseclose0.015 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Safari closeclosecloseclosesmartphoneclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Android Webkit 2.3closeAndroid 2.3Smartphoneyesyescloseclose0.053 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 13:42:16 | by ThaDafinser