User agent detail

MOT-AF/4.1.8 UP/4.1.16s
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
UAParser
v0.5.0.2
vendor/thadafinser/uap-core/tests/test_device.yaml
close MotorolaAFclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Openwave Mobile Browser 4.1 MotorolaAFMobile Phoneyes0.0156 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
MOT-AF 4.1.8closeclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
close closeclosecloseyescloseclose0 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Openwave Mobile Browser 4.1.16sclose MotorolaTi260mobile-browseryescloseclose0.2184 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
MotorolaAFsmartphoneyes0 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
No result found
UAParser
v3.4.5
close MotorolaAFcloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

closeclosecloseMobileclosecloseclose0.156 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

No result found
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Openwave 4.1 MotorolaAFmobile:featureyescloseclose0 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
close MotorolaTi260Feature Phoneyescloseclose0.0156 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
close MotorolaAFcloseclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 2016-05-10 07:52:32 | by ThaDafinser