User agent detail

Mozilla/4.1 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Symbian OS) Opera 6.0 [en]./MOT-A920./P325
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Source result (test suite)
ua-parser/uap-core
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
MotorolaA920 Detail
Providers
BrowscapPhp
6012
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.0
Opera 6.0closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom
Opera 6.0closeSymbian OS desktop-browsercloseclose0.193 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.5.2
Opera 6.0Presto Symbian OS MotorolaA920.smartphoneyes0.006 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.0
Opera MOT-A920.close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Opera 6.0closeSymbian OS MotorolaA920closeclosecloseclose0.007 Detail
UserAgentStringCom
Opera 6.0closeSymbian OS closecloseclosecloseclose0.051 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom
Opera 6.0 Symbian closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.403 Detail
WhichBrowser
2.0.10
Opera Mobile 6.0 UIQ MotorolaA920mobile:featureyescloseclose0.003 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
Internet Explorer 5.0closecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.6.4
close MotorolaA920Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.06001 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 13:43:26 | by ThaDafinser