User agent detail

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/4.6; Linux) KHTML/4.6.5 (like Gecko) Mageia/4.6.5-1.7.mga1
GeneralDeviceBot
ProviderBrowserEngineOSBrandModelTypeIs mobileIs touchIs botNameTypeParse timeActions
Test suite
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
vendor/whichbrowser/parser/tests/data/desktop/os-linux.yaml
Konqueror 4.6KHTML 4.6.5Mageia 1desktopclosecloseclose0 Detail
Providers
BrowscapFull
6014
Konqueror 4.6KHTML 4.6Linux Desktop0.009 Detail
BrowscapLite
6014
No result found
BrowscapPhp
6014
Konqueror 4.6closeLinux closecloseDesktopclose0.015 Detail
DonatjUAParser
v0.5.1
No result found
JenssegersAgent
v2.3.3
Mozilla closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
NeutrinoApiCom

Konqueror 4.6closeLinux desktop-browsercloseclose0.23801 Detail
PiwikDeviceDetector
3.6.1
Konqueror 4.6KHTML GNU/Linux desktop0.003 Detail
SinergiBrowserDetector
6.0.1
Konqueror 4.6;closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.001 Detail
UAParser
v3.4.5
Konqueror 4.6closeMageia closeclosecloseclose0.005 Detail
UserAgentApiCom

Mozilla 5.0KHTML 4.6.5closeclosecloseDesktopclosecloseclose0.15001 Detail
UserAgentStringCom

Konqueror 4.6closeLinux closecloseclosecloseclose0.07301 Detail
WhatIsMyBrowserCom

Konqueror 4.6 Linux closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0.24101 Detail
WhichBrowser
v2.0.18
Konqueror 4.6KHTML 4.6.5Mageia 1desktopcloseclose0.001 Detail
Woothee
v1.2.0
closeclosecloseclosepcclosecloseclose0 Detail
Wurfl
1.7.1.0
No result found
Zsxsoft
1.3
Konqueror 4.6closeMageia closeclosecloseclosecloseclose0 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 07:56:28 | by ThaDafinser