User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; de; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20071129 PmWFx/2.0.0.11
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/browser-seamonkey.yaml
SeaMonkey 2.0.0.11Gecko 1.8.1OS/2 Warp 4.5desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
No result found
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
No result found
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla 1.8.1.11close closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Mozilla rv:1.8.1.11closeOS/2 desktop-browsercloseclose0.21801 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
OS/2 desktop0.004 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Mozilla 1.8close closecloseclosecloseclose0 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
No result found
UserAgentApiCom

No result found
UserAgentStringCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.11closeOS/2 closecloseclosecloseclose0.10301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Mozilla 1.8.1.11Gecko 20071129OS/2 Warp closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24201 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
SeaMonkey 2.0.0.11Gecko 1.8.1OS/2 Warp 4.5desktopcloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
No result found
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
No result found

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 07:56:21 | by ThaDafinser