User agent detail

Mozilla/3.04 (compatible; ANTFresco/2.13; RISC OS 4.02)
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/os-riscos.yaml
ANT Fresco 2.13 RISC OS 4.02desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Zsxsoft
1.3
vendor/zsxsoft/php-useragent/tests/UserAgentList.php
ANT Fresco 2.13closeRISC OS 4.02closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Netscape 3.0Gecko Desktop0.004 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Netscape 3.0close closecloseDesktopclose0.01 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla close closecloseclosecloseclose0.002 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

ANT Fresco 2.13closeRISC OS 4.02desktop-browsercloseclose0.24801 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
ANT Fresco 2.13 RISC OS 4.02yes0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 3.04close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

No result found
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Netscape Navigator 3.4 closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.23701 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
ANT Fresco 2.13 RISC OS 4.02desktopcloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
ANT Fresco 2.13closeRISC OS 4.02closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:54:48 | by ThaDafinser