User agent detail

(Opera) Vodafone/1.0/HPiPAQDataMessenger/1.00.00 Browser/Opera/9.5 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 Opera/9.5 (Microsoft Windows; PPC; Opera Mobi/15142; U; en)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_ua.yaml
Opera Mobile 9.5 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera Vodafonecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera Mobile closeWindows HPiPAQ Data Messengermobile-browseryescloseclose0.19502 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 9.5Presto Windows HPiPAQ DataMessengersmartphoneyes0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera 1.0closeChrome OS closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera Mobile 9.5closeWindows HPiPAQ DataMessengercloseclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera Mobile close closecloseclosecloseclose2.74027 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 9.5 Windows closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.47005 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile Windows Mobile mobile:smartyescloseclose0.013 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Opera 9.5closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
Opera Mobile close HPiPAQ Data MessengerFeature Phoneyescloseclose0.023 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 13:42:28 | by ThaDafinser